4 ms·
So this is obviously dumb and short-sighted. But also ... why do they need it? - withdrawing the legal scaffolding that allowed the EPA to regulate emissions s
by abeppu 8mo ago
So this is obviously dumb and short-sighted. But also ... why do they need it?
- withdrawing the legal scaffolding that allowed the EPA to regulate emissions seems unnecessary if your EPA is already willing to just not actively regulate emissions?
- and the Trump administration has been surprisingly/concerningly successful when just ignoring the law regardless, so why does this corner of regulatory law matter?
- danans 8mo ago> So this is obviously dumb and short-sighted. But also ... why do they need it? It's more about propaganda and fodder for lawmakers who will try to use it to justify fossil fuel promotion legislation. It's not fooling anyone though. Most of the world - including the US - is well aware of that increasing GHGs are warming the atmosphere. Those whose livelihood depends on existing climate patterns is already feeling the effects. Some just don't care because they believe they are insulated from the effects, and gain huge amounts of wealth and power from a short term boost in fossil fuel demand. In their fever dream, they might wish that the world at large somehow forgets the physics of GHG emissions, but that's unlikely.
- OutOfHere 8mo agoIt is in preparation for the next (non-Republican) administration, to delay them from regulating it under their EPA.
- abeppu 8mo agoBut a Democratic administration could install an EPA head that will just roll this back quickly, right? Unless Congress actually passes something, the whole theory of the executive that Trump is pushing cuts both ways ... if we can still have fair elections.
- OutOfHere 8mo agoThe Republicans still want to add friction to the process. Every year of regulatory delay is a year in which the fossil fuel industry profits.
- Ancalagon 8mo agoCause ruining everything today isn't enough, they need to ruin everything tomorrow, too.
- drecked 8mo agoBecause this makes it harder for future administrations. As long as this was the court approved status quo (this has been through the Supreme Court before) a future reality based administration could re-implement it. However, now that they’ve removed it a new administration would have to add this or similar language back which could go through the legal process again (citing changed circumstances or something), allowing the current Supreme Court to knock it down.
- cosmicgadget 8mo agoIt's a culture war. Everything that contradicts the maga platform is a target.