POLITICO: ‘Climate Agenda Under Biden Has Been Stifled’

From Climate Depot

Marc Morano

White House climate office draws fire as actions stall – ‘Collapse of Biden’s legislative agenda’

The office headed by domestic climate policy chief Gina McCarthy has held up progress on multiple fronts, nine Democrats inside and outside the administration told POLITICO — accusing it of too often placing political considerations and relations with Congress ahead of weaning the nation off fossil fuels. The office’s micromanaging of other government bodies has weakened the Interior Department’s efforts to rein in oil and gas leases on federal lands, stalled a redo of federal ethanol policies and slowed White House efforts to address pollution in low-income and minority communities, said the Democrats, who include congressional staff and current or former Biden administration officials. … “There is a general sense that a number of these things were slow-walked or watered down,” said a Democratic staffer in Congress whose office serves on committees with climate policy oversight, referring to rules and executive actions the administration has taken.

https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2022/06/white-house-climate-office-draws-fire-as-actions-stall-00036886?source=email

White House climate office draws fire as actions stall

BY ZACK COLMAN | 06/03/2022 05:01 AM EDT

The collapse of President Joe Biden’s legislative agenda is drawing new scrutiny to the White House’s efforts to confront global warming — and Democrats’ complaints that his own Climate Policy Office is getting in the way.

The office headed by domestic climate policy chief Gina McCarthy has held up progress on multiple fronts, nine Democrats inside and outside the administration told POLITICO — accusing it of too often placing political considerations and relations with Congress ahead of weaning the nation off fossil fuels.

The office’s micromanaging of other government bodies has weakened the Interior Department’s efforts to rein in oil and gas leases on federal lands, stalled a redo of federal ethanol policies and slowed White House efforts to address pollution in low-income and minority communities, said the Democrats, who include congressional staff and current or former Biden administration officials. They were granted anonymity to discuss politically sensitive issues.

In some cases, they said, McCarthy’s office appears to be avoiding court fights or potential disruptions of negotiations with lawmakers such as Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). And that’s preventing regulators such as the Environmental Protection Agency from doing their jobs, the critics said.

“Instead of letting them do the business of writing rules, proposing them and publishing them, [the climate office] at their discretion will pull everything back and ask questions and delay,” one administration official said.

The criticism comes at a delicate moment for Biden, who came into office calling climate change one of the “four crises” facing the U.S., and who promised to put people to work upgrading the power grid with renewable energy and making millions of electric vehicles while cleaning up heavily polluted areas. Now, spiking gasoline prices and Russia’s war in Ukraine have forced the White House to devote efforts to boosting fossil fuel supplies at home and in Europe. Meanwhile, recent news reports indicate that McCarthy may be close to stepping down.

The White House countered that it has notched significant climate achievements, many of them embodied in the $1.2 trillion infrastructure package that Biden signed last year. The law — drafted with help from the office — approved tens of billions of dollars for deploying technology intended to reduce heat-trapping greenhouse gases from industry, installing electric vehicle charging stations and hardening the power grid against the effects of climate change.

But the detractors say Biden’s agenda is already suffering from Democrats’ travails in Congress, where Manchin’s opposition doomed efforts to approve more than $500 billion in climate spending last year. They said the climate office’s modest accomplishments and seeming lack of urgency are failing to fill the gap — which in turn threatens to dampen progressive voters’ enthusiasm for Biden’s presidency.

“There is a general sense that a number of these things were slow-walked or watered down,” said a Democratic staffer in Congress whose office serves on committees with climate policy oversight, referring to rules and executive actions the administration has taken.

Biden created the Climate Policy Office last year to implement his goal of putting the country on a path to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. To head it, he recruited McCarthy, a veteran regulator who had led the creation of major climate rules as Obama’s EPA chief.

McCarthy was one of two marquee climate appointees that Biden brought into his administration — along with John Kerry, the former U.S. senator and secretary of State who serves as his chief climate envoy. She sits adjacent to White House senior adviser Neera Tanden in the West Wing, and is in close contact with chief of staff Ron Klain and his deputy, Bruce Reed, noted American Clean Power Association CEO Heather Zichal, who was a climate adviser in the Obama White House.

Her supporters say her office has advanced many actions that would have fallen by the wayside without dedicated pressure, such as working to ensure that federal agencies keep climate change at the forefront of their rulemaking. They say the White House office is drawing heat because its actions have been overshadowed by congressional Democrats’ failure to move their climate legislation.

“There’s been a huge focus on legislation these first two years — rightly so to try and get something done,” said Center for American Progress’ Christy Goldfuss, who ran the White House Council on Environmental Quality under Obama. But because of the nearing midterms, she said, “that window is going to close. Then the administrative agenda becomes incredibly important.”

Others on the environmental movement’s left flank have called for dismantling the Climate Policy Office, seeing its existence as more of an impediment than a driver of climate action. They have said they would rather let the agencies and their experts do the work.

“With that czarship in place the climate agenda under Biden has been stifled,” said Jean Su, energy justice director and senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group that frequently sues the federal government over policy decisions. (Su is not one of the nine Democratic officials who have aired their unhappiness with the office.)

Much of the office’s criticism from Democrats on and off Capitol Hill focuses on the period before December when Manchin torpedoed hopes of passing Build Back Better, which would have spent hundreds of billions on clean energy and electric vehicle tax credits.

During that run-up, for example, the climate office edited an Interior Department review of oil and gas leasing on federal land and decided to quietly release it the day after Thanksgiving, a Democratic Hill staffer said. The review, which called for restarting oil and gas lease sales, largely ignored the effect that increased fossil fuel extraction would have on climate change — despite Biden’s promises to end oil and gas production on federal land.

….

Agencies sent the White House Office of Management and Budget data and methodology in December to define what constitutes a “benefit” for Justice40, but it has still not finalized that definition. And while the Biden administration last week tallied the money it has already committed to the effort, a separate administration official said “progress has been frustrating and slow.”

“While we wait, the White House expects Black and brown communities to be grateful for table scraps,” the official said.

In an email, a White House spokesperson rejected all the complaints about the office’s performance as untrue. And supporters of the office say it is an effective public messenger for Biden’s agenda and liaison to industry and environmentalists.

“We need solutions on steroids,” said Jane Lubchenco, the deputy director for climate and environment at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. “CPO is trying to provide the kind of coordination that enables that to happen.”

View this article online.

5 9 votes
Article Rating
54 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
fretslider
June 4, 2022 2:46 am

… drawing new scrutiny to Don Quixote’s tilting at windmills (and solar panels).

He hasn’t beaten la Manchin

Scissor
Reply to  fretslider
June 4, 2022 5:09 am

Sometimes Biden’s ineptitude is a good thing.

Ron Long
June 4, 2022 3:34 am

The Clueless And Green Wackos (CAGW) don’t need to worry about advancing the Net Zero Agenda because President Biden has, in his role of Commander In Chief, ordered the US military to fight Climate Change. Maybe bomb those oil refineries back to the Stone Age? And our economy with it? This liberal created problem is going to be addressed in the November elections. No other choice than to wait for it.

Steve Case
Reply to  Ron Long
June 4, 2022 5:49 am

This liberal created problem is going to be addressed in the November elections.
__________________________________________________________

You can bet that the Democrats will refine the methods they used to achieve their victory in 2020 only it won’t be in just the so-called battle ground states. Republican control of the House and Senate come January 2023 is likely to be very remote.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Steve Case
June 4, 2022 3:24 pm

Hoping you’re wrong!

Ruleo
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
June 4, 2022 6:51 pm

It’s going to be a bloodbath against MAGA/AF candidates. Every Dem/RINO will win.

The stolen election was never fixed..

Spetzer86
June 4, 2022 3:42 am

Moving away from fossil fuels is going to result in a long, cold, hungry Winter. Maybe not in 2022, but 2023 is not looking good right now. Where are the EV combines and tractors that can run 16+ hours a day with just a few minutes downtime to refuel? Has anyone seen and electric grain drier? How will the American farmer afford these things?

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Spetzer86
June 4, 2022 4:27 am

The EV combines and grain driers?
Didn’t you know they’re just about to be invented, just like those mythical batteries that will supply back up power when the wind’s not blowing for a week.
Griff’s working on them in his garage right now.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 8:14 am

Griffo’s recharging solution? 😉

USAlaser.jpg
Last edited 1 month ago by Old Man Winter
Old Man Winter
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 8:40 am

Mount one of these bad boy 400kw generators on a trailer & tow it. Cheating
virtue-signalling wokesters do that all the time with EVs! 😮

400kwgen.jpg
Dave Fair
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 10:59 am

Griff’s workspace is the kitchen table in his dreary high-rise apartment. He should get out and enjoy the good life of the American suburbs. Of course there are downsides such as my current project to add a second driveway for my RV.

Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 4:24 am

“We need solutions on steroids,”
These people are idiots.
When reality bites and the administration has to face up to the fact that cheap fossil fuels are essential for a functioning and modern economy then the green virtue signalling falls by the way side.

Richard Page
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 5:28 am

Bidens regime is finding out the hard way that you cannot please all the people all of the time, not even all of the climate advocates. One of the issues is that they are all pulling in different directions and trying to drag Biden with them.

Andrew Wilkins
Reply to  Richard Page
June 4, 2022 6:06 am

It’s always dragging him to the left.

Richard Page
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 11:26 am

He started off on the left; whether he’s being dragged further and further left or just round in circles is a matter of conjecture.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Richard Page
June 4, 2022 3:26 pm

May he be drawn and quartered by his own loony constituencies.

Ruleo
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
June 4, 2022 6:54 pm

It’ll have to be Leftists to draw and quarter cause only then does the DoJ look the other way.

Wear a red hat…

TonyL
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 5:57 am

the green virtue signalling falls by the way side.
Why on Earth would you think that?
So far this cycle, democrat policies have been at best a failure, at worst a disaster at both the presidency and the congressional level. There has been no movement to a “course correction” at all, at any level. If anything, they are doubling down. If anything, they seem willing to ride this one all the way down to disaster. Unless they know something that we do not.
But what could it be????
Right below here, commenter “rah” makes reference to something he calls “elections”.

Allow me to order up a custom prophesy:
There will be no elections come November.
Using a combination of COVID/MonkeyPox/Other there will be a total lockdown.
Plan A:
Mail-in ballots only. The dems have shown a complete mastery of any mail-in vote.
Plan B:
Ballots from selected regions are lost “en-mass” and fail to make the tally.
Ballot counts show some areas voted at a rate of 120% of registered voters.
Other areas turn out at 140% of eligible population.
(For the record: Voter turnout has typically been ~47% – 50% of registered voters for decades now.)

The news media shouts in a unified voice “No evidence of voter fraud.”

Last edited 1 month ago by TonyL
Dave Fair
Reply to  TonyL
June 4, 2022 11:03 am

One day after I voted early in the Primary Election, I got an unsolicited ballot from the Nevada state government in my mailbox.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Andrew Wilkins
June 4, 2022 11:00 am

The bite will come for Brandon and crew at the ballot box.

rah
June 4, 2022 4:25 am

So to sum it up: With the midterms looming, the democrats in Congress are unwilling to be politically crucified on the cross of Climate Change by their constituents for passing legislation that would materially effect their well being and increase already skyrocketing inflation?

This even as their press screams from high heaven about the level of CO2 reaching “twice the preindustrial level”? Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Levels Reach New High | Scripps Institution of Oceanography (ucsd.edu)

Climate Change is a major emergency they say, but their actions show that it certainly is not enough of an emergency in their minds to risk compromising their chances to be reelected even more than they already are since many of them already are facing an uphill battle to retain their seats due to the unpopularity of this administrations agenda and it’s serious effects on the poor and middle class households.

Derg
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 4:42 am

They don’t care about the poor 🙁

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Derg
June 4, 2022 4:51 am

Their only purpose is to be a source of ballots.

rah
Reply to  Derg
June 4, 2022 4:51 am

Only when they’re voting.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 6:47 am

This is Brandon country!

Bidvotr0.jpg
Old Man Winter
Reply to  Derg
June 4, 2022 7:14 am

Klaus Scwab is sending in reinforcements to make sure all of us are poor & loving it!

https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/27/biden-climate-officer-is-wef-alum/

KSchwab.jpg
Scissor
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 5:20 am

Twice the level would be about 580 ppm or thereabouts, in any case, one scenario is a human population collapse in many places as birth rates fall further below replacement levels.

If population does collapse, along with fossil fuel consumption, and CO2 levels continue to rise, then oh well sorry.

Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 5:37 am

Joe Biden and member of his cabinet repeatedly say that they want high gasoline prices. If this wasn’t an election year, I am quite certain Joe Biden would be asking Saudi Arabia to cut production, instead of flying there to ask them to increase production. I don’t believe any politician on the campaign trail. I believe them off the campaign trail because that shows what is in their heart.

During the 2020 election, I had several people ask me to vote for their guy. I always asked them to name 3 things their politician did to make my life better. Nobody was able to name one thing. I then asked the person why I should support your guy even though, by your own admission, he has done nothing to make your life better. However, I guarantee you that they still voted for the person who they admitted has done nothing for them. What this means is that no matter how bad their favorite politicians and political party treats them, they will still gladly vote for them. This is why I am not convinced that the republicans will win big in November. Especially since the democrats have learned they can cheat and the media will make sure it is covered up.

rah
Reply to  Wade
June 4, 2022 6:01 am

All that considered, it is quite evident the democrats in congress are scared about what could happen. Nothing is getting done in congress now to advance their agenda and though Pelosi is paying lip service to gun control and banning so called “assault weapons”, they aren’t moving on it with alacrity.

TonyL
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 6:47 am

Gun control is a perfect example. During the Clinton presidency, 1994, an “Assault Weapons” ban was passed and signed into law.
The reaction from an outraged public was swift and sure. The dems lost everything in the next election. They took such a fierce beating that they never brought it up again, since.

Until now, 28 years later. Now, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi is yapping about it. President Biden has mentioned banning handguns, rifles, all semi-automatic firearms of all types. All semi-autos includes the world renowned Beretta AL-390 series shotgun. A purpose-built target gun which quickly became the #1 favorite in Olympic and International shooting competitions. The dems seem to think this is a “Weapon of War”.

Little pushback from other dems, they seem OK with it all. After their last go-around with gun banning, this move seems truly suicidal.
Again, we have to ask, what do they know that we do not?

rah
Reply to  TonyL
June 4, 2022 7:13 am

There is no “assault Rifle” that does not have a full automatic or at least a 3 round burst capability (M16A3). That capability is what makes a rifle an “assault rifle”, not a large capacity detachable magazine, raised sight, or bayonet stud.

Ruleo
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 7:02 pm

There’s no such thing as an “assault” rifle. Stop using Marxist terms.

rah
Reply to  TonyL
June 4, 2022 7:15 am

They are quite simply trying to make a case for packing the SCOTUS.

TonyL
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 7:36 am

They are quite simply trying to make a case for packing the SCOTUS.
Unfortunately, quite true.

There is no “assault Rifle” that does not have a full automatic or at least a 3 round burst capability (M16A3).
Here in this corner we well aware of the differences. I prefer “full-auto” and “semi-auto”, myself. It would be great to have a discussion about firearms which centered on facts, not fear and emotions. (I know, keep dreaming) .

currently the term “assault rifle” is undefined (do not use), perhaps deliberately.
Eventually, we fear, congress will define the term. On that day, “The devil is in the details” big time. Legally, they can define it any way they like.

rah
Reply to  TonyL
June 4, 2022 8:14 am

IMO it is in fact defined as per the first rifle designated as such in its official nomenclature which was the WW II era StG 44 or Sturmgewehr 44. Sturmgewehr translates to “Assault Rifle”. I am not aware of any bolt action or semiauto rifle has ever been designated as an “assault rifle” in its official nomenclature.

Previous submachine guns and some carbines relatively had large capacity detachable box magazines, and of course basically all the basic issued rifles had bayonet studs.

The raised sights provide for the initial rise of the high velocity round the rifle fires. For example the 5.56 round of the properly zeroed M-16 passes through the line of sight in it’s gradual arc down at 100 meters.

TonyL
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 10:11 am

Interesting facts about the Sturmgewehr 44.
I was totally unfamiliar with the weapon.
Kewl.

Richard Page
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 11:37 am

The STG-44 was originally issued to the German 1st Infantry Division in 1943 as the MP-43 (MachinenPistole 43). It was the second assault rifle produced as the Luftwaffe had already issued the FG-42 (FallschirmjagerGewehr 42) although it was designated an ‘automatic rifle’ at the time. The loose translation of ‘assault rifle’ was not used until after the end of the war when it was applied to both rifles.

Richard Page
Reply to  Richard Page
June 4, 2022 12:18 pm

The reason these, and later assault rifles, were classed as a seperate class of rifles, and others such as the M1 Garand, FN FAL, BAR etc weren’t, is down to the round used. The usual definition of an assault rifle centres on the round being smaller than that used by classic rifles but larger than rounds used by SMG’s, machine pistols and most carbines.

rah
Reply to  Richard Page
June 4, 2022 3:05 pm

The function of the round being smaller yet with higher velocity is control on full automatic and weight of weapon. Have you ever handled or fired a M-22 BAR? I have. It takes one hell of a man to run and gun with that monster and control it’s fire when unsupported.
It was a squad automatic weapon.

The round size used in what are classified as assault rifles are SMALLER than those used in SMG’s, MPs. 9mm and .45 ACP are the rounds used in the most produced SMGs. They are pistol rounds.

The carbine is has a shorter barrel than a rifle and is lighter. In past times it usually fired a less powerful round than a rifle but in more recent times weapons like the Vietnam era CAR-15 have used the same ammo as an assault rifle.

I would recon the M1 and it’s several derivatives up to the M3 is the most produced carbine type in history. It fired a 30 cal round much less powerful than the M1 Garand.

The various Civil War carbines used by the Union Calvary also fired a less powerful round than the rifled muskets used by the infantry and had the advantage of being breach loaded.

This was in part a reason for the Union Calvary gaining the advantage on Confederate Calvary by mid 1863.

Last edited 1 month ago by rah
Richard Page
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 3:35 pm

Rah – apologies for not explaining more fully. SMG and pistol rounds may have a larger calibre in some cases but a smaller length of round. If you consider that the .45 ACP round is 11.23 x 23mm and is used in pistols and SMG’s, the M16 uses a 5.56 x 45mm round and is classed as an assault rifle and yet the m14 which uses a 5.45 x 50mm round is classed as a battle rifle and the M1 rifle used a 7.62 x 63mm round.

rah
Reply to  Richard Page
June 4, 2022 5:22 pm

The fact is SMGs fire a pistol round. The Maximum effective range of most military sidearms is considered 25 meters while the Maximum effective range of an SMG using the same round is considered to be 50 meters generally.

Maximum Effective range is that range at which the average soldier can be expected to hit a man size target.

rah
Reply to  Richard Page
June 4, 2022 3:27 pm

FallschirmjagerGewehr translates to Parachute Hunter Rifle.

Dave Fair
Reply to  TonyL
June 4, 2022 11:11 am

Lest we forget, the sawed-off shotgun was banned because it was not a weapon useful in the trench warfare of WWI. I assume similar reasoning was used for the ban on short-barreled rifles.

rah
Reply to  Dave Fair
June 4, 2022 3:30 pm

“Trench Guns” used in WW I were sawed off pump shot guns and they continued to be used, even by police departments, during the days of the depression era gangsters.

Last edited 1 month ago by rah
Dave Fair
Reply to  rah
June 4, 2022 6:22 pm

The Trench Gun (called a Riot Gun in the 20″ barrel configuration) is the Winchester Model 1897 pump action shotgun holding a total of 6 shells, each of which has 6 rounds of 00 buckshot and was certainly not a sawed-off shotgun with a barrel of 18″ or less. It came in various configurations with barrels of 20-30″ and was used in WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam.

Neither Miller or any other opponent of the 1936 National Firearms act showed up at the Supreme Court in the 1939 United States v. Miller case to argue against the United State’s opinion. The eventual decision said, in part: “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”

In the Court’s 2008 Heller decision, Justice Thomas pointedly wrote “The Court (in Miller) did not, however, attempt to define, or otherwise construe, the substantive right protected by the Second Amendment.” Heller did just that (as amplified by McDonald in 2010 in applying it to the States) by determining the 2nd Amendment protects the individual’s right to keep and bear arms outside of a militia context. The substantive right is retained by the individual, notwithstanding all this “militia” fog.

observa
June 4, 2022 5:18 am

Same in Oz and listen to Bronnie get stuck into the usual suspects and Morrison for trying to satiate the green blob and straddle the fence-
‘We do not have’ energy security: James Ashby (msn.com)

Pflashgordon
June 4, 2022 6:17 am

The lunatic fringe eating their own. Loony vs loonier. Dumb and dumberer. Where did the “journalist” Zack Colman get so far off the rails, given his education at Michigan State? Such extreme advocacy reporting. If he is not that dumb, then clearly he is a knowing propagandist/apologist of evil.

Dr. Bob
June 4, 2022 6:23 am

Leaders of influential countries can have massive impacts on global warming. Just look at Putin. He spews massive amounts of nitrogen compounds around for no other purpose than to blow things up. And in doing so, creates a future demand for incredible amounts of cement and steel that will have to be produced to rebuild the areas where he distributed the nitrogen compounds carelessly. So, what is the impact on climate change of one leader’s decision to control a region of land that he didn’t control previously? XR should be in Moscow right now.

Call me a skeptic
Reply to  Dr. Bob
June 4, 2022 7:55 am

We the climate realists are way to passive, allowing climate activists to control the narrative. Step 1, stop calling them climate alarmists and start referring to the whole cabal as climate fraudsters. Anyone, including the media who keeps pushing the climate catastrophe meme should be called out as a fraudster. Step 2, demand a national debate on the climate. The science is obviously on our side. People are misinformed by the propaganda assault from the media. Time to call a spade a spade. Trump talked about this Red Team Blue Team debate on the climate but never followed through. The only way this stops is keep the pressure up and keep calling bullshit on them. Now that gas is approaching 10 dollars a gallon, we have the people’s attention. The time is now to strike back.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
Reply to  Call me a skeptic
June 4, 2022 9:19 am

And, of course, the MSM will report the national debate fairly?

DaveinCalgary
June 4, 2022 8:27 am

You know why there is no government legislation compelling people to eat a few meals each day? Because people are compelled to eat born out by their experience and conviction in that experience. The fact that people are not switching to net zero by themselves tells you just what the real level of support and conviction citizens have for the climate nonsense.

It highlights the difference between what people say they care about, and what they actually care about. That disconnect shows just how easily people lie to themselves and others.

The people who think government is responsible for individuals choices are really admitting they lost the argument to convince the general public and now must force it upon people through tyranny.

James F. Evans
June 4, 2022 10:17 am

If it has been, then good.

Dave Fair
June 4, 2022 10:54 am

Deck chairs, Titanic. Nothing changes.

Gary Pearse
June 4, 2022 5:12 pm

Why was this article published?

%d bloggers like this: