Dems to Obama: You should really exercise some executive action on climate change
posted at 6:01 pm on January 24, 2013 by Erika Johnsen
President Obama’s conspicuous mentions of his born-again climate-change priorities in his second inaugural on Monday seemed at least partially designed to reassure the environmental lobby that his neglect of their favorite climate and energy issues since the start of the presidential campaign season is officially over. How much the president can really do for their pet interests, however, is up in the air — much like the gun-control debate, the president can’t ‘accomplish’ major items like cap-and-trade or international emissions treaties without the approval of Congress.
As we’re all painfully aware, however, the president has plenty of other means at his disposal for shaping environmental and energy policy — and certain Democrats are encouraging to go full throttle on the executive actions and administrative fiat on the climate-change front.
“Congress has not been interested in acting, especially in the House, in the last two years. So we’re calling on the president to develop a plan for the administration to take action without action without Congress. … That may well spur Congress to act,” Waxman, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, told reporters Thursday. …
Noting that, Whitehouse, Waxman and Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) laid out a menu of options for executive action on climate change in a Thursday letter to Obama. Among them were moves federal agencies could take to curb greenhouse gas emissions and enlisting national laboratories to pump out clean-energy technology.
The letter referenced using “broad authorities to lower heat-trapping emissions,” an allusion to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to regulate emissions from coal-fired power plants.
The green lobby, of course, is totally on board with skirting Congress, and they want President Obama to both talk the talk and walk the walk:
Environmental advocacy groups hope President Barack Obama will live up to the words of his second inaugural address that put climate change front and center on the national agenda even though he rarely mentioned it during the presidential campaign.
But the same advocates, including the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, say the president should use the power of the executive branch to further those aims rather than pursuing a congressional strategy. …
“Congress is a place where good ideas go to die,” she said. “There is a tremendous amount that his administration can do without Congress. He has the authority; he doesn’t have to wait for Congress.”
So far, that seems to be precisely what the White House has in mind: More of the same EPA regulations, green-energy subsidies, and bureaucratic approaches of yester-term are going to be the order of the day, so as to avoid too many job-killing restrictions at once and still dance around the soothing “all-of-the-above” approach they’ve been touting for awhile now. Weaksauce:
Energy insiders say the White House will dribble out executive actions and federal rules over the next four years — the same low-key, bureaucratic approach the administration has taken since 2009. …
“He led off with climate change. I don’t think you can ask for more than that,” said the official, who also urged caution about not expecting too much too soon. “A little bit of patience is warranted, but there has been a lot of strategy work going on.” …
Most important, EPA will be rolling out standards for new power plants beneficial to natural gas and that would essentially ban construction of new coal units. A second set of rules is also coming for aging electric utilities. There’s no schedule yet for finishing either set of regulations, though a senior Obama administration official said there’s reason to stretch it out to force opponents to the table.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.
hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM
Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?
mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?
parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM
They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.
They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.
A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM
MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.
rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM
I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.
fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!
And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM
They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!
KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM
I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.
Do they even know or care that they are morons.
marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM
His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.
DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:
You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM
That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM
Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.
myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Nah. I’d detest the little pissant s.o.b. if he was white…or Asian…or any one of the myriad of made-up racial divisions.
Solaratov on May 24, 2013 at 11:00 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2