110

California Tries ‘Trump-Proofing’ Its Climate Policies (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 2 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A second Trump administration would be expected to shred climate polices. California officials are devising ways to insulate its environmental regulations.

top 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 33 points 2 months ago

Trump election would be dire for the entire world.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

For sure, but it could be slightly less dire if a lot of states were able to somehow implement climate policy despite a Trump administration effort to maximize fossil fuel extraction and consumption.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

It’s all on California. It’s not just that a California is big, but they’re the only state allowed to define air pollution regulations. The rest of us can only choose between California or EPA. We’ll follow it if California can hold it together

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago

despite a Trump administration effort to maximize fossil fuel extraction and consumption.

But why ignore that Bidens admin broke Trump's production limits?

Shipping tons and tons of coal to China to be burned there just makes it worse, because we use even more fossil fuels to ship it to China...

[-] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 1 points 2 months ago

I think there are two good reasons to ignore what happened in Biden admin.

First, Harris is running, and despite her current platform she's likely to do much better on this, as per https://heated.world/p/when-kamala-harris-sued-obama-over

Second, even under Biden, this was forced, see https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/28/climate/biden-drilling-leases.html

(Kinda odd how they're now running as pro-fracking and how much they supported drilling when in fact they did so only because they were forced to, but hey whatever wins the votes I guess?)

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

While it's good their finally doing it....

The fuck did they wait for tho?

Biden broke Trump's fossil fuel production records, and him and Kamala have been pro-fracking for years.

It's not enough to just fight awful shit when a Republican is in office, we need to fight the awful shit the modern Dem party leaders want too.

Stop pretending everything is fine if the person doing it has a fucking D after their name, that can't be a total get out of jail free card or we're already fucked and there's no coming back.

[-] abff08f4813c@j4vcdedmiokf56h3ho4t62mlku.srv.us 1 points 2 months ago

While it’s good their finally doing it… The fuck did they wait for tho?

The GOP guy fought California and tried to shut down their rules and autonomy back when he was Prez. Biden and Harris wouldn't do that, so while they did continue to improve things in California there wasn't really a need for "proofing" per se.

[-] DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I live in one of the blue-ist cities in California and my city council refuses to build any housing near transit or build any bike or dedicated bus lanes. There was also an attempt to use school funds to pay for a new downtown parking garage. At this point, a Trump administration is the least of my climate worries....

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago

New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for New York Times:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/12/climate/california-tries-trump-proofing-its-climate-policies.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Rk4.2V63.DpMfWF760htL&smid=url-share

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024

110 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19238 readers

2088 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News