Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumGutting And Ignoring Climate Science Didn't Begin With Trump; A Reminder Of How Awful W Was
EDIT
Our story begins even before the worlds nations gathered in Kyoto in 1997 to negotiate a climate agreement. Before that meeting, the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate passed legislation that essentially prevented the U.S. from signing the Kyoto Protocol. Then, in March 2001, the newly-elected Bush administration announced that it would not implement the agreement. U.S. State Department papers showed the Bush administration thanking Exxon executives for the companys active involvement in helping to determine climate change policy, including the U.S. stance on Kyoto.
EDIT
As then-EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson explained in a letter to GW Bush, the latest climate change science does not permit a negative finding, nor does it permit a credible finding that we need to wait for more research. Johnson also indicated that a positive endangerment finding was agreed to at the Cabinet-level meeting. Based on the science and the Supreme Court ruling, Johnson outlined steps the EPA should take to regulate GHGs. Unfortunately, Johnson was not allowed to implement this plan. Politico reports that Johnson was ready to advance on GHG pollution limits but Bush overruled him after hearing counter-arguments from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, the Office of Management and Budget, the Transportation Department and, of course, Exxon.
Meanwhile, California tried to fill the regulatory gap by requesting in March 2005 that the federal government issue a waiver under the CAA. The waiver would enable the state to issue regulations on GHGs from motor vehicles that were stricter than federal standards. Before leaving office in 2008, the Bush administration rejected Californias request for a waiver.
EDIT
The Bush White House also pressured government scientists to suppress discussion of global warming and tailor their writings to fit the Bush administrations skepticism. A 2007 survey of federal climate scientists conducted by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that Nearly half of all respondents perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words climate change, global warming or other similar terms from a variety of communications. One U.S. scientist resigned his job rather than give in to White House pressure to underreport global warming by the Chief of Staff of the CEQ, who had no scientific training. After the edited documents were released, the Chief of Staff resigned and was hired by Exxon several days later.
EDIT
https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-10-16/an-insiders-look-at-the-shameful-history-of-epas-climate-inaction-and-why-we-must-turn-it-around/
CrispyQ
(36,482 posts)Funny how that works, huh?
snip...
TALLAHASSEE For the first time in a decade, a Florida Senate committee scheduled a meeting Monday to discuss the impact of climate change on the peninsula state.
What did senators learn?
We lost a decade, said Sen. Tom Lee, the Thonotosassa Republican who chairs the Committee on Infrastructure and Security.
He began the 90-minute hearing with three words that have not come from the lips of a Republican state senator in years: Sea level rise.
There hasnt been a lot of conversation about this. I understand that, and I understand why, he continued, leaving unsaid that the words climate change were banned from the lexicon for much of the eight-year tenure of former Gov. Rick Scott, and the states response to it was not considered a priority.
But now that climate change is knocking on your front door, you suddenly want to address it. Why is it so many people will not acknowledge a problem exists until it exists for them?