Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Browner Departure - "No Coincidences In Politics, Esp. During SOTU" - Mother Jones

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 01:14 PM
Original message
Browner Departure - "No Coincidences In Politics, Esp. During SOTU" - Mother Jones
On climate and energy matters, no one had the president's ear more than Carol Browner, for whom a special White House office was formed to lead the push for a wholesale overhaul of energy policy. Denigrated by the right and celebrated by the left, Obama's climate czar—who announced her resignation late Monday—ultimately failed in her central mission: shepherding legislation that addressed the threat of global warming. Political observers and environmental advocates view her departure as a sign that climate may have been banished to the back of Obama's domestic agenda once and for all. Some worry that Browner's resignation could also spell the end for the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy; and they are reading into the timing of the move, just a day before Obama's State of the Union and at a time when the administration has veered noticeably to the center.

"In politics there are no coincidences, especially during the State of the Union news cycle," remarks a House Democratic aide who works closely on energy issues. "It's hard to ignore this as anything other than a message of some kind."

EDIT

Yet her departure comes as many have given up any hope of passing comprehensive climate legislation during the remainder of Obama's term. With the House under Republican control, a stalemate on the issue is virtually guaranteed. And Browner, like other veterans of the Clinton administration, knows what it's like to deal with a divided Congress. After the Republican takeover of the House in 1995, Browner and the EPA were top targets for investigation and allegations of wrongdoing. Recently, at least one Republican House committee chairman listed grilling Browner as a top priority. Some Democratic insiders speculate that Browner may have departed in the interest of avoiding a repeat of the Clinton-era inquisitions at a time when her efforts aren't likely to pay off in any major way.

Others point out that the staff change comes amid personnel reshuffling at the White House, including most recently the appointment of former JPMorgan executive Bill Daley as Obama's new chief of staff, a move that riled progressives but pleased many business interests. That, along with the administration's more business-friendly tone following the midterms, has caused concern among some environmentalists that Browner was sacrificed in effort to bolster that centrist appearance.

EDIT

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/carol-browner-resignation-climate-change

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. Rocky Anderson says the word "climate" wasn't in the SOTU. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Joe Romm also noticed that
http://climateprogress.org/2011/01/25/obama-sputnik-clean-energy-standard-climate-change-global-warming/

<snip>

The bad news: The President could not bring himself to utter the words “climate change” or “global warming.” These omissions were depressingly predictable (see “Can you solve global warming without talking about global warming?“) and thus, predictably, depressing to climate hawks.

The ‘ugly’ news: The phrase “clean energy” has been redefined.

Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all….


Clean coal, of course, doesn’t exist, and it remains a big stretch to call nuclear ‘clean’, but at least this proposal moves the debate forward significantly. I don’t know whether a serious clean energy standard has a chance, but this appears to be the only plausible way forward in the climate/energy arena, given the death of a serious carbon price and GOP opposition to any funding increases for R&D or deployment.

<snip>

Given that the President’s major energy investment proposals are DOA — and that the low-carbon standard really only makes sense as a major policy initiative in the world that is trying to reduce carbon emissions — I do continue to think that it is both pointless and foolish, catastrophically so, in fact, for him to refuse to talk about global warming or climate change with so much of America watching.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. "The deck was stacked against her to start," says the aide.

Browner's small staff, meanwhile, was often shunted aside by strategists and political operatives who never saw climate and energy as winning issues, as accounts from White House insiders have indicated. "The deck was stacked against her to start," says the aide.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. liberal republican policies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC