Kamala Harris and AOC craft crazy climate law

Reposted from CFACT

By David Wojick |August 25th, 2020

Kamala Harris did not mention climate change in her acceptance speech, but she did not have to. She talked a lot about justice and justice is now code for climate. Thanks to Harris and AOC, the strange beast of “climate justice” is now a big part of the Democrat’s agenda.

In fact the team of Harris and AOC has now codified the concept of climate justice. Just before the convention they jointly dropped the Climate Equity Act into the Senate and House hoppers.

The Equity Act does not mean that everyone gets their fair share of climate. The stated goal is for the Federal Government to adjust its investments and regulations to favor those who are supposedly most involved with climate change, or something like that.

The proposed law is so incoherent that it is hard to tell what it is for or what it does. That it would cause an enormous amount of confusion is certain.

The problem is that the central concept in the law is extremely unclear. Harris and AOC have continued the “war on climate” theme that AOC used when proposing the Green New Deal. Thus the Climate Equity Act is about something called “frontline communities.”

Apparently these so-called communities are on the frontline of climate change, or the frontline of stopping climate change, or some such. It is very hard to tell.

Here is how the Kamala Harris press release puts it:

COVID-19 has laid bare the realities of systemic racial, health, economic, and environmental injustices that persist in our country,” said Sen. Harris. “The environment we live in cannot be disentangled from the rest of our lives, and it is more important than ever that we work toward a more just and equitable future. That is why, as we combat the climate crisis and build a clean economy; we must put justice and equity first. I’m proud to partner with Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez on this comprehensive proposal to empower communities that have been neglected by policymakers for far too long.

The Climate Equity Act creates an administrative structure within the federal government to ensure that as we boldly address the climate crisis, our policies are founded in equity and justice for frontline communities. By ensuring that frontline community leaders and allies are playing a fundamental role in shaping and guiding federal policy, the Climate Equity Act helps hold the government accountable for creating a more just and equitable future as we tackle the climate crisis and build a clean economy.

‘Frontline communities’ are those that have experienced systemic socioeconomic disparities, environmental racism, and other forms of injustice, including low-income communities, indigenous peoples, and communities of color. As the climate crisis continues, these communities and others, including deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, vulnerable elderly populations, unhoused populations, and people with disabilities and the women, youth, and future generations belonging to these communities — will be impacted first and hardest by the climate crisis.

The Climate Equity Act holds the government accountable to frontline communities when it considers a policy, regulation, or investment with a climate or environmental nexus which could broadly include direct policies to address the environment and climate change, but also transportation, housing, infrastructure, jobs, workforce development, and more.”

So everything depends on what a frontline community is. It is here that the confusion begins. This central concept, upon which everything turns, is deliberately not defined. That definition is something to be done after the law is passed, by an Advisory Board no less. I am not making this up.

There is however, this wildly over the top guidance in the draft law:

SEC. 205. DEFINITION OF FRONTLINE COMMUNITY.
(a) IN GENERAL. The Board of Advisors shall establish a definition of ‘‘frontline community’’ for purposes of this Act.
(b) INCLUSIONS. The definition under subsection (a) shall include, at a minimum
(1) a community or population that has experienced systemic socioeconomic disparities, environmental injustice, or another form of injustice, including
(A) a low-income community;
(B) an indigenous community; and (C) a community of color;
(2) a community or population that is the most vulnerable and will be the most adversely impacted by environmental and climate injustice and inequitable climate actions, including
(A) a community or population described in paragraph (1);
(B) a deindustrialized community; (C) a depopulated rural community; (D) a vulnerable elderly population; (E) an unhoused population;
(F) individuals with disabilities; and
(G) a community that is economically dependent on fossil fuel industries; and
(3) the women, the youth, and all of the descendants of women or youth that are part of a community or population described in paragraph (1) or (2) above
.”

Note that section (2)(F) says that individuals with disabilities are by themselves frontline communities. One person communities? And the Advisory Board cannot change this inclusion. In fact all they can do is expand the definition to include more people.

I have no idea what section (3) means. It sounds as though if you are a descendent of a woman (but not a man?) in a frontline community you are still in it, or something. Or maybe only the women and youths in a frontline community are actually in it, not the older men? This section is truly incoherent.

Note too that in addition to communities there are also populations. What the difference is I have no idea. Perhaps communities have to be geographically together while populations do not, such as all the elderly people in New Mexico.

There is no way to tell from this incredibly vague and incoherent definition where the frontline communities are or who is in them.

The law requires that every proposed federal regulation, policy and investment (all grants, loans, etc.) that affects any frontline community must be analyzed for its impact. The negative impact must be minimized and the positive impact maximized. In the case of investments the agency is required to favor frontline communities to the extent allowed by law. Whether this includes federal contracts is unclear.

Given that there is no way to tell what a frontline community is, the result can only be chaos. Agencies cannot analyze what they cannot identify. If they try, in big money cases the attempt is certain to wind up in Federal Court, which the proposed law specifically allows for.

This law is modeled after the infamous National Environmental Policy Act, which requires environmental impact analysis of all federal, federally financed, or approved, projects. But in this case it is the economic impact on something undefined that must be analyzed and optimized.

This is the worst proposed law I have ever see. It is both wildly overreaching and deeply incoherent. But then the concept of climate justice is itself incoherent.

That Kamala Harris and AOC have teamed up to produce this complete nonsense is an ominous sign of things to come if the Democrats prevail in November.

Author

David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy.

For origins see

http://www.stemed.info/engineer_tackles_confusion.html

For over 100 prior articles for CFACT see

http://www.cfact.org/author/david-wojick-ph-d/

Available for confidential research and consulting.

159 thoughts on “Kamala Harris and AOC craft crazy climate law

    • I sure don’t dismiss them – they are at the head of wave of hate-mongering evil like we have seen in nearly a century – supported by an equally evil enabling press.

      • Such Hate hasn’t been glimpsed since the rise of Nazi Germany
        With…
        Persecution of entire races
        Expunged ideas that don’t follow acceptable party ideals (group think)
        Elimination (burning) of any book that disputes acceptable party ideals (group think)
        Indoctrination of acceptable party ideals (group think) during early youth
        Elimination of free thought, expression that might run counter to acceptable party ideals (group speak)
        Elimination of free speech is the first step to Fascism
        Control/restriction of information access is the second

        • The Democrats have spent the last 4 years calling Trump every name under the sun.
          Then they turn around and whine about how Trump is dividing the nation.

      • In terms of infrastructure changes and roll out of renewables, they are only proposing what is long established government policy in large parts of Europe (and which has had no deleterious effects on society).

        The UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, for example, recently wrote to the UK’s Council for Science and Technology to broadly welcome their proposals for a sweeping national net zero decarbonisation programme…

        Uneconomic, you could argue, not justified by the level of climate impact: but ‘evil’? Dial down the rhetoric!

        • Are you actually claiming that quintupling the price of energy has no “deleterious” effects on society?

          Making poor people even poorer is not evil?
          Preventing people from having access to life saving energy is not evil?

        • Bullshit, Grift – the rhetoric has already been dialed up by YOUR side – the return rhetoric is absolutely apropos and accurate. And utter apologistic slime like yourself has enabled it.

          Yeah – fascism is evil and you progressives have put it on steroids.

        • What is the price of electricity in Germany compared to other countries in the EU, griff?

          That alone falsfies your statement!

          And would you consider socialist control mechanisms that violate individual human rights in favor of a political collective like Germany had in WWII or the Soviet Union had for 70 years evil or not?

          I certainly would, and warning the world about such plans for the US requires we dial UP the rhetoric or we repeat history’s hard lessons!

          What are you trying to do?… promote another disaster?

        • Pure evil, comes this way. Only those perpetrating it (whether bandleader or useful idiot) don’t want you to understand the evil behind their actions. It is abundantly clear that we are well into WWIII, just the working masses haven’t noticed yet, although the fact of President Trump says something to people seeing through it. I actually find it amazing and encouraging that people like myself who want an unbiased look at the world are still able to get to the truth with a little work despite all the efforts of media propagandists.The Marxists cannot block out the truth completely like Stalin and Mao etc. could and that is a wonderful thing.

    • I take them as seriously as I would Joseph Stalin, Hideki Tojo, Adolf Hitler, or Mao Zedong if I could take a time machine back 100 years. How many died at their hands or war actions?
      Estimates vary but,
      Stalin: 40 – 80 million
      Tojo: 20-40 million (mostly Chinese)
      Hitler: 10-15 million
      Mao: 50- 80 million

      The Democrats have embraced Fidel Castro. How many millions of Cubans have suffered under the Castro regime since 1960? Direct death are easier to caluculate than generations of economic despari and misery’s toll on a population. The one shining light for many Cubans was the nearness of freedom across the Florida straits.

      Conservatively 140 million, more realistic probably over 160 million direct deaths in 20th Century from those butchers. And many in the Democratic Party are eager to tread those past totalitarian footsteps for attainment of the political power those bloody paths lead to. The Climate Change scam, aka climate justice, reparations nonsense, BLM marxism, it is all about power; a boot on the face of every American except those few who wield the power.

      So No. I do not dismiss Harris and AOC. I see them for what their political philosophy would bring to this country. They loathe the US Constitution and the restrictions and severe limits it puts on the government’s ability to use power over the People.

    • Not sure, Joe, who you are speaking to. I certainly do not dismiss KH and AOC, quite the opposite. As I suggest at the end, they are a dangerous duo. The Dems might even pass this Climate Equity nonsense. Hence my article.

    • Joe, I do not believe any rational human dismisses either of those bimbos.

      Anyone who proposes and/or present legislation that is as close to Jabberwocky as one can get cannot be dismissed or ignored.

      This has to be stopped before it starts.

    • Climate alarmism used to require a Ph.D

      Then perfesser AOC showed up with, allegedly, a college degree of some sort, maybe Marxist studies. But that’s old news now.

      True climate expertise now requires dropping out of high school, like perfesser Greta *thundering* Thunberg.

      So now I only listen to high school dropouts for my coming climate crisis knowledge and timing.

      And I also listen tol Al *the climate blimp* Gore, because he also invented the internet.

    • Joe
      you haven’t seen anything yet
      BIDEN wins and HUNTER buys an island in the Caribbean for $500,000,000 (drug farm ? ,)

  1. “The Climate Equity Act creates an administrative structure within the federal government to ensure that as we boldly address the climate crisis, our policies are founded in equity and justice for frontline communities.”

    Business as usual. Can any problem be solved by signing a check?

    • “Can any problem be solved by signing a check?”

      Absolutely! As long as it’s a check for OPM (Other Peoples Money). But, it can become a problem when you run out of OPM.

      • ” (B) a deindustrialized community;”

        I wonder if she realises that the GND will make B = The entire country ?

    • By the way, anyone catch AOC’s – pathetically moronic twit that she is – and her ‘plan’ to save the post office, by creating government-sponsored pen pals so everyone will buy a a lot of stamps?

      She said she’d been ‘thinking about this’, and this is what she came up with.

      And elected congresswoman and college-graduate.

      Kinda diminishes both.

      • Joel, you ended your comment about AOC with “Kinda diminishes both”.

        Perfect.

        Stay safe and healthy, all.
        Bob

      • I take exception to your use of the word, “kinda.” More like, “Absolutely.” But they also have lots and lots of company in both categories.

      • So’ she wants the Government (taxpayer) to subsidise stamp-buying so that letter-writers will use the USPS, which is a Government agency supported by the taxpayer. So why not just cut out the middleman and pay government money directly to the USPS (so they can process Democratic postal votes more efficiently).

      • Well, they’ve got the government supported window breakers on board, so might as well add some pen pals so the physically handicapped don’t feel left out, right comrade? It’s amazing that these humans got elected. I feel sorry for less radical people trapped in NY & Kalifornia. They’re saddled with these nitwits more than the rest of us.

    • Okay, but people, how does one explain to these dingalings — er, gals – that’s it! gals that there is no climate crisis and they are committing fraud?

      And just how do they intend to deal with whatever they refer to as “elderly people”????? Are all these old folks going to be sequestered against their will in unhealthy and crowded facilities, like there used to be in Them There Olden Days when a “nursing home” was a place you were sent to die?

    • From my perspective, because of all the “and”‘s, both written and unwritten, it will cover everyone, until such time as the payments are due to start.🤩

  2. As the article says, “This is the worst proposed law I have ever see. It is both wildly overreaching and deeply incoherent. But then the concept of climate justice is itself incoherent.”
    How can they manage a climate justice law when there is no evidence, at least not yet, that there is a problem with the climate. Making laws on incomplete, future forecasts is really silly.

    • Timothy,
      There you go again, asking for evidence; next you’ll want science and data!
      We don’t need no stinkin’ facts OR data! Our feelings of care and concern for the environment outweigh any evidence!
      Since I now self identify as a Native American lesbian I can use this law to get justice from all you who thrive due only to your white privilege! I might even have to sue myself for failing to transition from my old, white, cis-gendered male body; that makes about as much sense as most of what Sandy says!

      • I know few white people who’ve lived as privilages a life as Kamala Harris. Her father was a university professor ( whose ancestors owned many slaves on their Jamaican plantation) and her mother was a doctor. They lived in an upscale Berkeley neighborhood and she was voluntarily bused to a ‘white’ school.
        As an adult her married boyfriend got her 2 sinecures, high paying government jobs requiring little work. She ran as a Democrat in a deep blue state, so no competition.
        Wish I had her privilege and she had to do-waka-do.

  3. “… justice is now code for climate.”

    Justice is now code for Marxism/Communism, not climate. Climate Change has been code for Marxism/Communism, also, hence the moniker Watermelons. Environmental green on the outside and commie red on the inside.

    • ‘Climate justice’; ‘Black justice’; ‘Victim’s justice’? What the hell does justice mean in the context of ‘climate’? Justice for what? For whom? For why? These people know about as much about climate as they do about the English language.

      • The meaning of the words used is not the meaning they are saying. They’re using double-speak.

        Words like Revolution, Great Leap Forward, Green New Deal. These imply a thing that is desirable, but they implement something that cannot achieve that goal. They implement a totalitarian regime which simply gives them more power and you less power.

        Read between the lines, used to be taught in school. Now I never hear this phrase anymore.

        • Reading between the lines, pretty much everyone except white males are included in frontline communities.

    • Exactly! Even if there were serious climate impacts, this list is not who will take the hits. It is mostly a list of potential Dem voter groups, with no connection to climate issues.

      • I was just going to comment,
        David,
        It’s not so unclear what a frontline community is. It is any group of client constituents who can be bribed to keep voting for radical leftists by redirecting funding that was ostensibly going to “solve” the climate emergency toward new wealth transfers. It’s a process for making sure that Democrat voters benefit and Republican voters are brutally punished.

  4. I’m even confused about the targets of the deception campaign. Is this a political play involving mirrors too?

    • I will Second that motion. Just in case nobody else thinks so. But I doubt that, and hoping for a clean sweep of all branches of Congress and the Whitehouse. This is the only way to defeat these dangerous socialist/marxist ideologues and send them packing.

  5. “In reality, they’re not after me, they’re after you. I’m just in the way.”

    Donald Trump continues to be proven correct just as Kamala Harris and AOC continue to demonstrate.

  6. First, the incoherence of this law may be by design. It will enable ad hoc judgements and rule making.

    Second, I am very sorry what has happened to the Democratic party, but I notice that as long as any proposal is tied to some leftist claptrap, none is too over the top stupid to oppose. Brains eaten away by 24/7 propaganda and echo-chamber. We need a principled opposition, the Democrats are, unfortunately, not it.

    • Leaving the central concept “frontline communities” undefined is certainly deliberate. It gets defined by an Advisory Board that consists mostly of the kind of people who will get all of the redirected investment money. It is a huge ongoing check with “pay to” left open. No doubt they will be very generous with each other. A whole new kind of pork!

    • “I am very sorry what has happened to the Democratic party”

      It’s too bad so many Democratic voters haven’t noticed. They’ve been slowly coerced into thinking that Socialist/Marxist policies are consistent with a liberal (i.e. freedom/liberty) agenda. Once freedom morphed into free stuff, the party was doomed and now they’re blatantly attacking freedom with the most reckless political platform ever conceived by a major political party.

  7. OK, the Climate Equity Act is a bunch of rambling nonsense. However, if the “Climate Equity” part means I can have some more hot weather and some other (volunteer?) gets colder weather, sign me up. Hello?

    • No it says if you are white privilliged you pay compensation to the other person because they don’t have the weather they want. It’s a wealth redistribution scam.

  8. I think it’s a great opportunity for Republicans/Trump, to demonstrate in e.g., ad campaigns showing how wild
    out of touch, unreasonable, rediculous, even laughable her policies are. Attack ads. This is a person who would have a very good chance at becoming President in less than a four year term (if Joe wins) … e.g., if Joe became incapacitated or totally senile (already is showing strong signs of senile progression. And the talking heads are talking about her running for Pres in 2024.

  9. What’s frightening is the high regard these obviously low intellect people have for themselves. They actually are proud of this incoherent tripe.

    • The Lady of Dunning Kruger House! A new mini-series based on the life of Socialist Hero of the Republic; Sandy the Bartender! Brought to you by PBS and the makers of ChiCom-19!

    • David,
      They have every participation trophy, from kindergarten forward, to bolster their virtue signalling self-esteem. And no nasty science facts to get in the way of their childishly naive opinions. Easy peazy!

      Q: Why is there red lipstick all over the steering wheel in AOC’s car?
      A: She still hasn’t learned how to blow the horn…

  10. And the board shall be known as the Unification Board. Just in keeping with the Atlas Shrugged theme of the democrats “Destroy America” platform.

  11. “The proposed law is so incoherent that it is hard to tell what it is for or what it does. That it would cause an enormous amount of confusion is certain.”

    Ultimately, confusion is the goal of the socialists. When nobody knows what the law means, then the courts are free to interpret the law however they want.

  12. “That definition is something to be done after the law is passed”

    What was it Pelosi once said about another law? You have to pass the act in order to find out what is in it.

  13. Apparently we’re all part of a frontline community since we all had a mother that lived in a society fitting sections 1 and 2. What tosh!

  14. Charles
    This is similar to the war on terror that Bush junior embarked apon. That is we make the rules up as we go along. The outcome is non specific. If you think that US economy is damaged now, if these clowns get in the fun will really start.

    As one of my wiser American friends once said, “we have never been that good at electing the right people”. He was also the master of understatement.
    Good luck at the ballot box.

    • If reality doesn’t match your delusions, just make it up. It’s not like you’ll ever know the difference.

      Remember, this is the guy who believes that the British installed Lincoln as president in order to stop northern factories from using slave labor.

  15. Of course KH knows and AOC’s handlers know that “climate anything” is a power grab by appealing to voters who don’t realize that their very normal human concerns about their future are being co-opted.

  16. RE: “…the realities of systemic racial… injustices that persist in our country,” said Sen. Harris.”

    This quite well describes the systemic racial injustices fomented by the Democrat party, (D) Kamala Harris, et.al., for centuries in the USA. The party of slavery in the pre-Civil War USA. The party that murdered President Lincoln, emancipator of the slaves. The party that created the deep state Klu Klux Klan and Jim Crow laws across the southern USA. The party that slew Dr. Martin Luther King. The party that opposed the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1967 (notably authored by (R – IL) Sen. Everett Dirksen and broadly supported by the Republicans). The democrat party of endemic racial divisiveness. The Democrat party of Kamala Harris and Joe Biden.

    It’s not too late for democrats to change their race baiting divisive ways, however. The first step is to admit you democrats have a problem….

    • J Mac,
      Well she does have slaveholders in her lineage; so maybe it’s a family tradition, just like Hank, Jr. sang!

    • J Mac
      Yes Lincoln emancipated the slaves – but you must always ask why. Lincoln was only doing the Rothschild biding. England banned slavery in 1833 almost 30 years before the US. Over 80% of the production from England was exported to the US, and now that they had to pay for labor they were noncompetitive. So Lincoln, who had spearheaded the railroad and land holdings of primarily English based barons was put into power with the instructions to end slavery. This put the productive cost on an even footing, and the US production facilities in turmoil. However you will not read this in the history books.
      Regards

      • I’ve heard some wild conspiracy theories before, but you take the cake. Again.

        First off, when did the English ever sell cotton to the United States? There were no slaves in northern factories.
        Secondly, Lincoln was put into power? Do you honestly believe that people in the US were voting based on how the English were telling them to vote.
        Lincoln had nothing to do with railroads and he never was in a position to influence who purchased or ran railroads.
        Do you have any evidence that everyone who owned a railroad back then was secretly a British agent? Or is that just more of your insanity leaking through.

      • There was plenty of anti-North and anti-Lincoln sentiment from the Brits, both the wealthy and in government. Brits relied on Southern slavery for cheap cotton. Queen Victoria declared Britain neutral ahead of a potential US civil war, which Lincoln interpreted as recognition of the Confederacy. There was the Trent Affair during the war. After the Emancipation Proclamation, the City of Manchester voted to boycott US cotton.

        The Brits waited 30 yrs and lost 80% of production to the US before they finally took action? Lol.

      • Ozonebust,
        You are entitled to your opinion by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. My knowledge of history does not agree with your assertions, however.

  17. I am a man, but I am (from 3) a “descendant” (son) of a “woman” (yes – surprising I have a mother) who is “part of a population” that is (from 2D) “a vulnerable elderly population”(all elderly are vulnerable – duh). So surely I qualify. I think everyone qualifies.

    Hey, where’s my check?

  18. Another stunning victory for the Sandy the Bartender School of Economics! The incoherence of this proposed law isn’t a flaw, it’s a feature!
    Bureaucrats and politicians can make the law mean whatever they want and I’m sure aggrieved homeowners and businesses could spend themselves into oblivion trying to resolve issues or obtain justice!
    I’d say that Sandy’s brain is like a mighty bear trap, one that’s sprung shut and then rusted in that position; but I think it more likely she was taught to be open minded. So open minded that her brains fell out!
    Harris is just an opportunist; like the Hildabeast she isn’t very likable and has mostly succeeded only when riding on someone else’s coattails. She sees running on the Harris/Biden as a chance to capture the presidency by guile, playing the Trojan Harris! A match made in heaven! Not!!

  19. “A BILL To ensure climate and environmental justice accountability, and for other purposes.” It may be overall incoherent but the purpose is clear in the first 7 pages dealing with. as on page 3–“… any policy to address climate and environmental justice must acknowledge that climate change is an immediate crisis, the impacts of which the United States is already experiencing; and a systemic injustice multiplier;….”

    And on pages 4 and 5 under the “ENVIRONMENTAL OR CLIMATE CHANGE NEXUS”
    would cover just about everything, the other purposes no doubt.

  20. Well, who would have thunk it? Another moronic law with no cohesive theme or idea that will cost the US trillions and reduce us to a third-world banana republic while the elites — remember them? They want “equality for all!” — will get richer and more powerful while destroying the greatest country in the history of the world.

    Yup!! Yet another piece of legislative shit crafted by people with 2-digit IQs — well AOC is certainly no brain, and marches to the orders of Bernie Sanders, who has been a fanatic communist since the get-go — which Congress “will have to pass in order for us to know what’s in it,” as another congressional fool, Nancy Pelosi, once said about Obamacare. And how’d that one work out? They couldn’t even get the computers to work correctly!

    How can such a large portion of the US buy into this destructive garbage? How can they have been brainwashed, in 20 years, into thinking that the US, which people worldwide risk their lives to come to for opportunities they cannot get in their native countries, is a systemically evil, racist, misogynistic, homophobic, etc., etc., etc. nation? Can anyone answer that question??

    • Paula,
      Remember what George Carlin said: “Think of how stupid the average person is, then realize that half of them are stupider than that!” And that was before forty more years of dumbing down our education system!

    • I haven’t really been able to understand it either, but I’m getting a glimmer as I read Ayn Rand’s “The New Left”, especially the essay The Comprachicos. It was written 50 or so years ago, and now seeing the results is quite chilling.

    • Argentina is a lesson on what happens when governments enact entitlement programs:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33i_BAhuiE0

      From a major economic powerhouse in the early 1900’s to a struggling economy 100 years later.

      From the video:
      ” With an increasing flow of funds into these entitlement programs, the government’s payouts soon became overly generous. Before long its outlays surpassed the value of taxpayers’ contributions”

    • The answer is quite easy. The very large megaphone of the mainstream media, tilting evermore left as the years go by, coupled with an education system, K – college, that has systematically “dumbed down”
      and re-engineered said education system, to transform little skulls full of mush, to little skulls full of marxist BS! They been workin’ on it for over half a century, and it has proved fruitfull for the scum-bags who desire a compliant population!

  21. Just before the convention they jointly dropped the Climate Equity Act into the Senate and House hoppers.

    I have an idea. Let’s not elect crazy people to Congress and the White House. Or just make sure that they are in the minority.

    For those who see everything through the lens of “race” and are easily triggered when they hear the word “minority”; in this context it means “not in the majority”. Any reference to racial minorities is simply your misinterpretation of plain English; an easy mistake to make if your out of your mind.

  22. Kamala Harris and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, woooh-hooo, you go for it!

    Kamala Harris and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez really show how the wimin’s social rationalism is just as good as the men’s. They’re the wimin with the spirit of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara but in the American Democratic Party! Shout it out — ‘Social Justice for all!’

    [/sarc-off]

  23. Let me explain: let’s give money to everyone who is not a non-homeless heterosexual white male, and make the non-homeless heterosexual white males pay for it.

    • If there was a flood, would the ‘frontline communities’ get preference for aid over the more affluent neighbourhoods that are equally washed out?

      Of course, all of them could then be considered homeless so possibly all qualify.

  24. There’s nothing in the quoted extracts or the wider article to limit applicability of the CEA to the United States. Just imagine how much fun they could have using this as a foreign policy and overseas aid tool. And that’s just for starters…

  25. Speaking as one descended from a woman, the vaguer the laws, the greater the power of the government.

    • That’s right. The power comes from regulations established by the bureaucracies to implement and administer the laws.

  26. It’s congress’s duty to write laws that are exact. They don’t want to waste the time doing so and instead delegate it to unelected government employees. This would be acceptable if the results were returned for congress to be incorporated in a bill then voted on again however it isn’t. At the result, nearly all of the rules and regulations we live by are unconstitutional.

    This is a progressive idea dating in writing back to Woodrow Wilson where the country is run by the president and staff with congress only serving as oversight. We went through a great deal of trouble eliminating rule of a king and this is nothing more than giving us back our king. Congress doesn’t think far enough ahead to understand that this type of government could put them out of a job.

    It’s simply a power grab as if Harris becomes president, she will have nearly unlimited powers by redefining the law as needed through executive orders.

  27. This needs to get published in every newspaper before the election. There are some legacy sane people out there who need to see what’s coming.

    • Whatever the Left wants it to mean today, a meaning which may be different tomorrow. Its intended effect in any case is to be used as a club to beat someone over the head with in a baseless accusation to silence dissent.

    • From study_com:
      “What Is Environmental Racism?

      A lot of people are pretty lucky to get up in the morning and take a breath of fresh, clean air, or turn on the tap and drink clean, uncontaminated water. But not everyone is so lucky in this country or other parts of the world, for that matter. It seems that a disproportionate number of people who live in environmentally hazardous areas are either minority groups and/or are people of low socioeconomic status. That’s what environmental racism is basically about. It’s the placement of people into environmentally hazardous areas or, conversely, the placement of environmental hazards into areas with high numbers of minority individuals and/or economically destitute populations. ”

      We have to read our Mao’s Little Red Agenda21 Amendments.

    • you know when clouds roll in and the sky gets dark?
      it does that cause the sky and the environment are rayciss.
      that hurts black people.
      sned mese all ur moneyz now.

  28. It appears to me that the frontline communities are being burned and looted by the vulnerable populations in a frenzy of inequitable injustice — sponsored by Kamala, AOC, and the rest of their Marxist globalist conspiracy.

    The smoke from the burning cities can be seen from outer space. It is adding a huge amount of CO2, PM2.5, and other volatile carbon pyrolysis compounds, heavy metals, and toxic fumes to the atmosphere.

    The drafters are the looters and arsonists who are polluting the planet. They ought to be pointing the finger at themselves.

  29. Quote:
    “COVID-19 has laid bare the realities of systemic racial, health, economic, and environmental injustices that persist in our country,” said Sen. Harris. “The environment we live in cannot be disentangled from the rest of our lives, and it is more important than ever that we work toward a more just and equitable future. ”

    Democrats have been pounding the inequality drums for some 55-56 years now ever since the 1964 Civil Rights Act and President Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” in 1965. I am not criticizing either piece of legislation here when I refer to them.

    I am suggesting here that if the Democrats are still not happy with the amount of progress they’ve made toward alleviating inequality after more than half a century, then they should seriously consider the possibility that they’ve been a failure at it. In response to this claim of failure, they can certainly blame the Republicans for standing in their way–and they no doubt would do so.

    If their aim is still to eliminate all racial and economic inequality with the force of government, they might as well throw out the U.S Constitution and our current form of govt and replace them with a full-blown Marxist state. Getting rid of the Republicans would certainly have to be prerequisite for such an act, and it would more than likely mean either prison or execution for all of them.

    I suggest here that a democratic society with a free market economy that respects property rights (among other rights) cannot and should not expect the complete elimination of racial and economic inequalities with the force of govt or with force from anywhere else. Government can only do just so much in a free society, and the federal and state govts have probably done all they can in this area. Any additional progress can only come about through the gradual evolutionary change of society itself along with economic grown and opportunity. Even then it may still never happen. I challenge the Democrats to show me one — just one — civilization or organized society in human history that was totally classless and egalitarian.

    These claims of “climate injustice” and “environmental injustice” may very well be just code terms for Marxism. When the Left attaches social and economic issues to the debate over climate change and environmentalism, it becomes patently obvious that the latter no longer have anything to do with the science of climate and the environment. They become just a clever back door through which radical socio-political ideologies can sneak into the building with few or no red flags of warning being waved. And there are probably plenty of people out there who will buy it all hook, line and sinker.

    With no serious push-back to the climate alarmist narrative coming from the Trump administration and the Republicans, this whole circus can go forward with no challenges to the bad science that lies underneath. If the clowns in the center ring make into power in November, the future of the U.S. might look far from bright.
    I hope I am wrong about that.

    • I recon the assassination of JFK was a clear message of who was / is in charge. Certainly not the people.

  30. Great article, except it scares the hell out of me.

    As I was reading, I kept thinking: “sounds like of like NEPA [the National Environmental Protection Act]” and “Whoa! NEPA on steroids!”

    “… (G) a community that is economically dependent on fossil fuel industries; …”
    Seems to me that somewhere close to 50% of this nation’s electricity is still generate by coal, thus 50% (or more) should be classifiable as “economically dependent on fossil fuel industries.” Between jobs in production, transportation, etc., of not just fossil fuels, but most things — plus the need to either take public transport or personal vehicles (both of which I believe remain overwhelmingly powered &/or lubricated by fossil fuel products) — we need to consider home heat, light, etc.

    Actually, according to the Pew Research Center:
    “In 2018, those “fossil fuels” fed about 80% of the nation’s energy demand, down slightly from 84% a decade earlier. Although coal use has declined in recent years, natural gas use has soared, while oil’s share of the nation’s energy tab has fluctuated between 35% and 40%.” ({BTW, they also say wind and solar amounted to less than 4% all energy used that year.]

    I’d say that’s pretty much everybody! Including celebrities who own their own 747s, because, well, they “need to”.

  31. It seems clear to me that the bill envisions a “Frontline Community” as a poor black one, with a smattering of other colors as well just to improve the image. They are to get bigger subsidies, more tax breaks, more cash per person than others when the climate “fixes” wind up costing consumers more, as they surely will. It’s just a wealth redistribution scheme where work and achievement count for naught.

  32. “war on climate” and “climate justice”
    As long as we are attempting to end titanic natural forces how about a “war on the tides” or “sunset justice”? It is unfair that the tides go up and down, forcing beach creatures to adapt to rapidly changing environments. And why should the sun be allowed to set? This forces half of the Earth’s population to live in darkness or burn fossil fuels to keep the lights in!
    We demand justice for the mist vulnerable! Stop these unfair and constantly changing conditions or we will raise taxes!!

  33. https://ajustclimate.org/

    “A VISION FOR AN EQUITABLE AND JUST CLIMATE FUTURE”

    “What is the Equitable and Just Climate Platform?

    The Equitable and Just National Climate Platform advances the goals of economic, racial, climate, and environmental justice to improve the public health and well-being of all communities, while tackling the climate crisis. Environmental justice advocates and national environmental organizations have committed to advocate this historic, bold platform that lays out our shared vision and goals, including:

    A healthy climate and air quality for all
    Access to reliable, affordable, and sustainable electricity, water, and transportation for every community
    An inclusive, just, and pollution-free energy economy with high- quality jobs
    Safe, healthy communities and infrastructure

    why you should make the commitment

    Systemic racism and injustice have left economically disadvantaged communities, tribal communities, and communities of color exposed to the highest levels of toxic pollution, as well as the most vulnerable people subject to more powerful storms and floods, intense heat waves, deadly wildfires, devastating droughts, and other threats from the climate crisis.

    This is a critical moment to define bold and equitable climate solutions that address the legacy of environmental racism while rebuilding the U.S. economy in ways that work for everyone—not just the wealthy few. By signing on to the platform, organizations can commit to working with us to ensure that all people and communities have the right to breathe clean air, live free of dangerous levels of toxic pollution, access healthy food, and share the benefits of a prosperous and vibrant clean economy.”

  34. I like “the unhoused population” – much more scientific-sounding than homeless, not to mention derelicts and junkies. Yes, to normal people it sounds completely insane, but like all legislation its underlying purpose is rational–written by lawyers to make lawyers rich, or richer. The litigation possibilities are endless, with litigators and government agency defendants’ lawyers both paid by the ultimate saps – the taxpayers.

    • Yes, I call new laws with undefined central concepts “scapegoat laws” because the definitions will be worked out through a huge amount of expensive litigation. NEPA is the classic case where “environmental impact” was the undefined concept. But as Gene says above, the CEA is like NEPA on steroids.

  35. An air crew is accountable for let’s say, a few hundreds of souls. From ground school up, checks, grumpy captains, medicals, proficiency, simulator, evals, ratings, recurrent training, you name it, we must overcome it all and all the time.

    On the other hand, a bartender & co. are deemed qualified and fit to “fly” a whole superpower nation under the guidance of a dementia challenged captain… The outcome is largely predictable, no need to read the flight plan.

  36. 1. Shit is the sort of stuff you shovel in a barn Good and hones but smelly
    2. Shite is nasty stuff that trickles down your legs when you have an accident. This AOC/ Harris nonsensewill Run and Run
    3. Shoite is what some people speak esp some of the sponsor ofthe bill smelly but not very honest
    The words are not quite interchangeable.
    so which word would best apply to this Cr@p from our democratic leading lights

  37. I think that Humpty Dumpty can help us with this.

    “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

    Exactly. “frontline communities” means whatever lefties want it to mean.

  38. What is climate equality and how do we get. Is it that everyone should live in a Hawaiian climate? It about optimal for humans, but how do we get there? It also begs the question what do we do for the snow Skiers do we create perfect snow 365 day a year? That how I see climate equality a impossible idea that sound good and allow the Stalinist like heals up Harris and bubble head AOC to rule, sorry I want no part of that world.

  39. Our Bryony Worthington did it first, over here in Fantasy Island UK. Drafted the Energy and climate change act for government coming to it with an English LIt degree and from a job as an activist for FoE.

    From the same delusional box of frogs as AOC. Privileged know nowt eco nutter who doesn’t care about maintaining our economy at some respectable level we worked for decades to achieve bit by bit, as long as she is well set up. Seems no one in government at senior level understands engineering reality or how science is done. It doesn’t affect them, only the poor people they disinherit by law.

  40. From the article: “The proposed law is so incoherent that it is hard to tell what it is for or what it does.”

    Just what I would expect to see from AOC.

    “Incoherent” is a good description of AOC. And she seems so sure of herself, too. That’s because many delusional people *are* sure of themselves. It’s part of their delusion.

  41. Beware the woke.

    Victoria is the ‘wokest’ state in Australia. It is the only state that has failed to crush CV19. Hotel quarantine for incoming overseas arrivals was very effective in other states but not Victoria.

    An example of how woke goes wrong emerged when a government employee gave evidence at an inquiry into the quarantine failures. The employee was a supervisor with Parks Victoria, trained in supervision, first aid and fire fighting. He volunteered to transfer to the Department of Health and Human Services as a supervisor for the hotel quarantine. Before commencing the new roll he was required to undertake training. You might expect that training would cover disease control – you would be wrong. You might expect that there would be safety training on the correct use of PPE – you would be wrong. The priority for selection of security guards was given to new Australians, women and aboriginals, the guard was required to attend a one hour training session on diversity in the workplace.

    One of the emerging issues is that the security guards, selected from recent immigrants, had little to no grasp of the English language. Written instructions were meaningless.

    Diversity was the only factor given priority in the selection of guards. They could be licensed security guards after attending a one day course.

    The supervisor, mentioned above, left the role after 4 weeks because he was concerned for his own health and the health of his family as more security personnel were becoming infected.

    I am concerned when people in politics have not produced anything concrete in their entire life. No connection with land; no connection with industry; no connection with business enterprises; no connection with life’s essential support services.

    • Rick will
      Sometime(hopefully) in the distant future, politicians will have to pass a practical as well as intelligent test, ( what do you use a hammer for ? And how )

  42. “Justice”.
    Today whenever I hear that word with an adjective attached (other than “Blind Justice”), I can’t help but think of Bill Clinton’s famous, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
    Or, from The Princess Bride,
    “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

  43. Please allow a perplexed Aussie to point out whoever drafted
    this gobbledegook that they seem to be unaware of theVenn
    diagram
    Try to fit these categories into one shows its impossible
    Moreover there is one clause that requires “environmental justice ( whatever that is) for communities dependent on fossil fuel industries”
    It could be argued that pretty much is most of the USA ( other than the moonbeam gatherers of California

  44. My favorite description of one kind of “frontline community” was:

    a community that is economically dependent on fossil fuel industries

    Um … er … doesn’t that describe every community on the planet?

    w.

    • There might be a few 4th world communities that rely on burning dung.
      But we’re usually not allowed to contact them so as not to contaminate them with out modern culture.
      (We’ll “study” them but we won’t help them.)

  45. Democrats literally see racism in the very air they breathe! I’m so glad not to be so damaged and jaundiced and jaded! KAG 2020!

  46. Frontline communities’ are those that have experienced systemic socioeconomic disparities, environmental racism, and other forms of injustice, including low-income communities, indigenous peoples, and communities of color.

    I think they’re talking about Obama with his very own frontline community by the raidly rising sea.

  47. ‘‘(E) It shall not be in order in the House of 15Representatives or the Senate to consider any bill or 16resolution with an environmental or climate change 17nexus that is reported by any committee of the 18House of Representatives or the Senate unless the 19Director of the Climate and Environmental Equity 20Office has published a statement on the quantitative 21and qualitative impacts to frontline communities of 22the legislation prepared under subparagraph (B).”

    That is the most frightening part of the bill. It proposes to put a climate Czar in place who would have more power than Congress.

    • These morons were hysterically enraged about President Trump overstepping separation of powers……. you can’t make that up.

  48. When a democrat uses the word justice in association with anything you can be sure there will be no “justice” involved.

  49. It’s a quilt project and not a national energy policy plan.

    But then U.S. energy policy since the days of Jimmy Carter have been a national disgrace and a low bar for comparisons. Remember Edward Markey’s excuse of “who could have known” and other policy fails like Solyndra loans and grants with the Obama slogan of “we don’t pick winners” because they picked politico losers.

  50. Trump is “empowering communities” with economic development zones! People need jobs and clean water more than anything the Green New Deal has to offer!

  51. The craziness goes on and on, and on. China has just seated one of their diplomats on the tribunal overseeing maritime disputes. … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl6D3RQ1nNg

    The above site is from India. WION does a great job of delivering news. Their news anchors tell the story versus the propaganda stream which the lefty media sites feed to the public on a daily basis.

  52. “systemic racial, health, economic, and environmental injustices”

    The most overused word is not “social” or even “racist”, it’s “systemic”. Everything is now “systemic”. In French too (“systémique”).

    When they slip on the floor when walking out of their shower with their wet feet, they (probably) say : systemic slippery floor proves oppressive water lubrication is racist.

  53. It sounds like everyone in America except white males are members of ‘Frontline communities’

  54. “(G) a community that is economically dependent on fossil fuel industries”

    Aren’t we all dependent, in one way or another, on fossil fuels and the industries that provide them?
    So doesn’t that line make all of us members of a frontline community?

    “(3) …all of the descendants of women or youth…”

    Wouldn’t that line include everyone in a community? Show me someone who is not a descendant of a woman. And why add “youth” to the equation? Descendants of youth also have mothers and therefore are also descendants of women. It’s redundant.

Comments are closed.