What Biden has done is to cut the issuance of drilling leases to the minimum required by law, pass the Inflation Reduction Act, enact a regulation to force vehicle electrification, and similarly force fossil fuels out of most power plants.

What Biden has not done: stop issuing drilling permits or impose export restrictions on fossil fuels. The former has some serious limits because of how the courts treat the right to drill as a property right once you hold a drilling lease, and the latter is simply untested.

    • @[email protected]OPM
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      The Republicans control the House of Representatives. Nothing can happen right now in the direction that we need as a result because zero of them will vote for it.

      The Inflation Reduction Act barely passed with Vice President Kamala Harris as a tiebreaking vote in the Senate because it was structured to fit within the budget reconciliation rules and therefore not subject to filibuster.

      It’s going to take a lot more Democrats in both the House and Senate before a moderate President can pass climate legislation. Even then, it’ll need to survive a court that’s hostile to the idea.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        That’s really the fundamental issue, isn’t it? There is absolutely no democratic processes on the federal level. We get to pull a lever once every two years, and that is supposed to be a meaningful democratic participatory process.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            I don’t think that organizing within a private corporate party apparatus counts as participating in the democratic process more generally. Especially one that has admitted it has no obligation to follow its own rules. There needs to be a direct democratic process on a federal level. The majority of the population, regardless of party affiliation, support measures such as universal healthcare, but our process doesn’t empower collective change, rather it empowers minority interests over the majority, as evidenced by the legislation pushed and policy positions held by the federal government. Even good representatives can’t do anything because they’re hamstrung by an inherently partisan political process. Let the people speak. Where they are allowed to speak, we have seen big changes, (legalization of cannabis, ending of qualified immunity, bail reform, etc), but where the only avenue for change is through elected office, we have stagnated for decades behind the rest of the developed world.

            • @[email protected]OPM
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Organizing within the system is exactly how we’ve gotten as much as we have.

              The alternative is to roll the dice with revolution, and that’s about as likely to end up in a much worse place than we’d otherwise get. That’s really only a rational choice when you don’t have other avenues to change policy.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                11 year ago

                I suppose that depends on what era you’re referring to. It wasn’t working within the system that won the right to unionize, it was work outside the system that provided the necessary pressure to coerce concessions out of the government.

                • @[email protected]OPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Unionization started as an outside-the-system thing, but really took off under FDR because of legal changes made by supporters of it who were elected to Congress. You can get started on the outside, but actually getting to where we need to be means holding power.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    1
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Union growth was at its strongest in American history during the period between 1900-1920. There were already millions of union members decades before FDR ever took office. It was a 50+ year battle starting in the 1800s, I don’t think I’d call that starting. I’d call FDR the results of that movement, if anything.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        Nope, they could force it to a floor vote then contrast the dem’s votes to the rethuglican vote then compare the lobbying $ that goes to each.

        Put it to a vote then shame them. THE WORLD IS COOKING.

        • @[email protected]OPM
          link
          fedilink
          51 year ago

          They can’t actually force a floor vote in the House because the Speaker there controls the schedule.