"I'm one of the first guys to introduce a climate change bill, way, way back in '87."

[Budi]

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/may/08/joe-biden/was-joe-biden-climate-change-pioneer-congress-hist/

The Delaware senator’s first climate change bill, introduced in 1986, died in the Senate.
But the following year a version of Biden’s legislation survived as an amendment to a State Department funding bill. President Ronald Reagan went on to sign it into law.

The upshot of Biden’s Global Climate Protection Act was to call on the president to set up a task force to plan how to mitigate global warming.

Biden spoke about the bill on the Senate floor in January 1987 in terms that seem uncannily familiar to present-day warnings. He discussed, among other ills, the threat to human habitat resulting from melting polar ice caps and rising sea levels.

"Life on this planet exists only under highly specialized circumstances," Biden said during a Senate session. "Indeed, so special are these circumstances that even a small rise in temperature could disrupt the entire complicated environment that has nurtured life as we know it."

The measure also called on the president to make climate change a higher priority item on the U.S.-Soviet agenda.

"President Reagan told Secretary General Gorbachev ‘that if we had an invasion from Mars, both sides would put aside our differences.’ While not an exterrestrial threat, global warming could prove no less dangerous," Biden said.

Biden’s amendment became law when Reagan signed the Foreign Relations Authorization Act on Dec. 12, 1987.
********************

Biden’s bill was not the first time Congress focused on climate change.

In 1976 — decades before making the Academy Award-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" — a 28-year old freshman congressman named Al Gore, D-Tenn., held House hearings on climate change.

In 1985, then-Sen. Gore introduced a concurrent resolution — a non-binding legislative measure — in which both chambers of Congress asked the president to an international research program on greenhouse gas emissions.

But it was a Senate hearing in June 1986 that historians recall as a watershed moment in the public’s understanding of the threat posed by global warming. Biden’s Republican colleague in the Senate, John Chafee of Rhode Island, held the hearings.
*************


Giving credit where credit is due. President Biden, along with Al Gore years earlier, was not only sounding the alarm on climate change, he wrote a bill convincing enough to get a Republican President to sign it.

Thanks Joe Biden.

Maybe someone can let Greta know what Joe was warning & doing for climate issues, years before she was born

[questionseverything]

1. So why do you have a problem with greta?

The post was great until the last sentence

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

7. Because she's been very critical of Joe Biden on the topic of climate change.

[questionseverything]

13. Then debate the points honestly, not do a non specific smear

Democrats can not win with out greta and the young people that think the same way

🤔

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

16. Talk to Budi about it

I was explaining his stance.

I doubt Greta saw the comment.

[questionseverything]

19. I was asking, he doesn't respond

I am sure you are correct that greta won’t see it but what about the young people who identify with her?

Probably not many young people here either

O well

[George II]

23. She did a "non specific smear" of President Biden. Please lecture her. Thanks!

[Polybius]

40. Most young people never heard of Greta

They're more interested in Cardi B, Kim Kardashian, and Tik Tok.

[JoeOtterbein]

24. K n R ! Thanks for posting!...

..What I was thinking!

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

27. I don't think it's so much having a problem with Greta but answering the following statement by her

Are you inspired by any of the world leaders, by President Biden?

If you call him a leader — I mean, it’s strange that people think of Joe Biden as a leader for the climate when you see what his administration is doing. The U.S. is actually expanding fossil fuel infrastructure. Why is the U.S. doing that? It should not fall on us activists and teenagers who just want to go to school to raise this awareness and to inform people that we are actually facing an emergency.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/magazine/2021/12/27/greta-thunberg-state-climate-movement-roots-her-power-an-activist/

13th question posed to her. If you can get past the paywall.

[JoeOtterbein]

30. I hope it's more than what he felt about a...

..."statement". I liked the OP until the last sentence.

We need many more like Greta.

[Spider Jerusalem]

2. We can all see what he's doing RIGHT NOW, which is a bit more relevant

and things like this do not inspire confidence.

[Budi]

3. Cool headline.

From your link:

The president signed an executive order in January directing the Secretary of the Interior to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters and to begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.

But in June, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction to block the administration’s suspension and ordered that plans continue for lease sales that were delayed for the Gulf and Alaska waters.[/b]

[Spider Jerusalem]

4. I thought this was a political discussion board, not a personality cult (n/t)

[Budi]

6. June, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction to block the administration's sus

This is in the article below the damning headline you linked to.



The president signed an executive order in January directing the Secretary of the Interior to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters and to begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.

But in June, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction to block the administration’s suspension and ordered that plans continue for lease sales that were delayed for the Gulf and Alaska waters.

[Celerity]

12. Revealed: Biden administration was not legally bound to auction gulf drilling rights

Justice department admits a previous ruling did not force the detonation of what environmentalists call ‘huge carbon bomb’

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/dec/13/revealed-biden-administration-was-not-legally-bound-to-auction-gulf-drilling-rights

The Biden administration admitted that a court decision did not compel it to lease vast tracts of the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling, shortly before claiming it was legally obliged to do so when announcing the sell-off, the Guardian can reveal.

Last month, the US government held the largest-ever auction of oil and gas drilling leases in the Gulf of Mexico’s history, offering up more than 80m acres of the gulf’s seabed for fossil fuel extraction. The enormous sale, which took place just four days after crucial UN climate talks in Scotland, represented a spectacular about-turn from Joe Biden’s previous promise to halt offshore drilling and was denounced by outraged environmental groups as a “huge carbon bomb”.

The president’s administration insisted it was obliged to hold the lease sale due to a court ruling in favor of a dozen states that sued to lift a blanket pause placed on new drilling permits by Biden.

But a memo filed by the US Department of Justice before the lease sale acknowledges that this judgement does not force the government to auction off drilling rights to the gulf.

snip

[orleans]

20. why the hell would they do that? (auction off all that seabed for fossil fuel extraction when

they didn't have to) ????

i just don't understand why--and it's maddening and heartbreaking and very disappointing

[Celerity]

25. Indeed, plus they made many public statements that were contradicted via their own court filings.

I do not not have a good answer for any of it.

That move is what really set Greta Thunberg and shedload of other anti climate change people worldwide off. It also personally cut me off at the knees within my own social set of influence (especially with the American expats, many of whom I like to think that I played some role, even if a small one, in successfully getting to vote in 2020) as I used the 'They were legally bound' defence to defend the administration's actions on those lease auctions. I got totally blindsided, as did many others I am sure.

[Budi]

8. Jfc. "Personality cult"? So, crediting Biden's history on climate warnings is a personality cult?

C'mon..

[Spider Jerusalem]

17. 35 years ago? Like the song says, "what have you done for me lately?"

[Budi]

18. The link you gave isn't from 35 years ago. You'll have to choose your battle here.

Yes. This is what Biden was prevented from doing for us lately, By a Louisiana Judge.
Maybe try to get past your ire for President Biden and at least read the article you linked to.


Once Again, From Your Link.

This is in the article below the damning headline you linked to.


The President signed an executive order in January directing the Secretary of the Interior to halt new oil and natural gas leases on public lands and waters and to begin a thorough review of existing permits for fossil fuel development.

But in June, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a preliminary injunction to block the administration’s suspension and ordered that plans continue for lease sales that were delayed for the Gulf and Alaska waters

At least be honest about what message you're sending about Biden, aside from just the headline.

Thanks.

[orleans]

21. great - now can you explain the article linked in post 12? nt

[paleotn]

26. Some don't seem to understand the difference between disagreement and attack.

They see any disagreement as heretical and that drives me nuts. Though I may disagree with this point of policy, I can see why the Biden admin may have gone ahead with the lease sale. Oil markets have been jittery as hell lately, and though much of what's been leased wont come on line anytime soon, it does help to calm markets, put downward pressure on global oil prices, reducing US gas prices and giving the GQP one less easily understood point to run on in 2022. We may get the carbon bomb issue, but the majority of voters probably don't. And it won't matter anyway if we lose the House in 2023. It's a hard call and I can see both sides.

[questionseverything]

33. Keeping the house/senate are the goals

Which makes it more important than ever to keep the young environmentalists on our side

We need them to turn out and support democrats

[orleans]

38. thanks. that helps. nt

[paleotn]

32. On balance, his record is very good....

but lets not think he's perfect. Life, particularly political life, doesn't work like that. I think that's the point being made. Cult of personality is a bit unwarranted though I agree. They also have to understand that these issues are extremely complex, so thinking Biden has suddenly become a petroleum fanboy isn't accurate either.

The lease issue is probably a political calculation in my mind. It may seem to suck on its face environmentally right now, but there's a ton of factors in the calculus. Calming oil markets may be one that Biden is weighing when making this call. Getting global oil markets and domestic gas prices under control may go a long way in helping Dems in 2022. Certainly won't hurt taking that arrow out of the Republican's quiver, since many voters decide on a few easy to understand issues.

The leases unleashing a carbon bomb is a bit of hyperbole. Lots of ways to short circuit that besides kiboshing the gulf leases. If electric vehicles expand their market footprint in the coming years and decades, there won't be as much market for what gets pumped out of those leases, thus not much more carbon bomb than what we were sitting on prior. In short, Biden made a decision that involves risk. What decision on his level doesn't? I can live with that. I may not like all his decisions all the time, but I'm not privy to all the factors either and if I want only my decisions made then maybe I should run for prez.

[mcar]

9. So, DU members are not allowed to post positive information

about Democratic President Joe Biden? Lest we become a "personality cult?"

Good gad, I thought we got over this during the Obama years.

[Cha]

10. What are you talking about..

"personality cult"?

We're for Democracy on Democratic Underground.

There's absolutely no need for Insults.

[Cha]

5. It's Good to know the History

of what others have done.. especially Pres Biden.

[Budi]

11. Sen Biden's bill, from the 100th Congress. Would be interesting to know who all opposed this.

Here's the info on Sen Biden's bill, from the 100th Congress

S.420 - Global Climate Protection Act of 1987
100th Congress (1987-1988)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/senate-bill/420

[Cha]

14. Mahalo!

[brer cat]

15. K&R and thanks, Budi.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

22. What did the task force end up doing?

[WA-03 Democrat]

28. Thanks Budi!

The Democratic Party has been on this issue since the 60s and unfortunately things have gotten worse and or going faster than modeled. I think every living thing has all their eggs in this one fragile blue basket.

[ARPad95]

29. I just so happened to be working on my husband's genealogy today and found an obituary

Last edited Sun Jan 2, 2022, 02:03 PM - Edit history (2)

for his 2nd cousin 2x removed (meaning born 2 generations before my husband), Walter Albert Patrick, who was a retired professor emeritus of chemistry when he died in 1969 at age 81. Highlights from his obituary:

* From 1917 to 1958 he taught as a full professor at John Hopkins University where he researched methods of stopping river pollution from coal mines and also worked on the problem of disposing of atomic wastes.

* In 1955 he detailed in a lengthy interview methods of changing "hot" or radio-active atomic waste into artificial rocks.

* He opposed tossing atomic material into ocean waters because of the threat to marine and fish life.

* He also devised methods for halting the flow of pollutants from coal mines into nearby creeks and rivers.

* His education was completed at Syracuse University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and University of Göttingen in Germany.

https://invention.si.edu/walter-albert-patrick-papers-1901-1968

The collection's research strength lies in its documentation of two aspects of twentieth century science: commercial applications of scientific discoveries, and the use of science to solve problems created by science. Both points are covered by Patrick's work with silica gel.

[skip]

Patrick's discoveries included a process for treating oils and oil distillates to remove impurities, a method of dehydration, and techniques for acid mine waste treatment. In 1954, Patrick entered into a contract with the Atomic Energy Commission to perform "research on methods of formation of insoluble minerals to permit fixation of long life radioactive wastes." Basically, Patrick proposed to turn the waste into solid rock. In theory, then, the decay rate would be slowed down so as not to be harmful to human life.

So he was at least one person sounding the alarm and doing something about it in the 1950s.

[NJCher]

36. Remarkable

Would be very proud of this family member.

[ARPad95]

39. Thank you for your comment, NJCher!

Very proud. My husband got a DNA cousin match on Ancestry.com who is the grandson of Walter Albert Patrick. He and my husband are 4th cousins.

Another prominent scientist in my husband's family tree was his 1st cousin 4x removed, Edward Williams Morley:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edward-Williams-Morley

In 1887 the pair performed what have come to be known as the Michelson-Morley experiments, which failed definitively to detect any “ether-drag” effect on the speed of light measured in various directions relative to the motion of the Earth. This result was a major step leading toward Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity.

[Ford_Prefect]

31. A few of you may recall that in 1977 President Jimmy Carter created the Department of Energy

"with the goal of promoting energy conservation and developing alternative sources of energy."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Energy

Carter was the first to set energy conservation as a national policy.

[questionseverything]

35. He put solar panels on the White House

Just one more thing carter was ahead of his time about

[hatrack]

34. Atmospheric CO2 content 1976 - 332.04 ppm; Atmospheric CO2 content 1987 - 349.31 ppm

Atmospheric CO2 content 2020 - 414.24 ppm

https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/data.html

So, yeah, Al Gore and Joe Biden have done yeoman work on climate and environmental issues, as have many other members of Congress (Sheldon Whitehouse, Ed Markey, Kathy Castor, George Miller, Henry Waxman, Karen Bass), and they deserve credit for what they've been able to do.

In the mean time, we (human beings) have added 175 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere and oceans since then-Congressman Gore's hearings in 1976. Has global annual atmospheric CO2 content declined since 1976 or 1987? No. Will it decline any time in the next ten years? Probably not. Will it decline at any time in the foreseeable future, barring something genuinely catastrophic like halocline collapse? Probably not.

Credit where it's due, certainly. But there's only one metric that matters here and it's not hearings or task forces. And if Greta Thunberg pointing out that (A) that metric has not changed and (B) actions taken to date have not cut atmospheric CO2 content, and are unlikely to do so in the future pisses you off, well, sorry. No political leader has changed that trend in greenhouse gases, and it seems unlikely that current political leadership, here or elsewhere, will change it anytime soon.

That's reality.

[betsuni]

37. K&R

[Martin Eden]

41. Identify real problems and champion a necessary course of action

That's what we should expect of our leaders.

Joe Biden has not always been right about everything; what politician has?

But he has always worked diligently and honestly on our behalf, has admitted mistakes, has been open to new information, and gotten back to work for all of us.

Only one of our two political parties continues to embrace that ethos.

The other is worse than an obstacle to necessary change; it seeks to destroy not only the hard won progress of previous generations but also the very foundations of our democracy.

[Ron Green]

42. As long as any politician, including Joe Biden, supports economic growth

he’s not working to avert the climate crisis.

[Hortensis]

43. Biden's entire congressional voting record is at the League of Conservation Voters site.

The LCV started maintaining records on both each session and party and for individual members of congress just before Biden was first elected, so 1970, breaking them out into various categories; "climate" bills got their own category later.

The pattern of ratings is worth noting. These days virtually all fairly new Democrats have 100% lifetime ratings, Republicans 0%. It wasn't always that way, as looking at ratings in the early 1970s shows, and lifetime ratings have to be evaluated in the context of changes over 50 years and comparing with others. By 1970 the Republican Party had already begun its scorched earth war against combating climate change; but records of some Republicans, especially from western states, still reflected some earlier concerns for environmental issues.

Biden quickly became an important representative for environmental interests in an era when that record and a $20 bill would basically buy lunch for one of his field crews.

https://scorecard.lcv.org/