too painful to watch
“time for action”
It seems that “America first” means America alone … and that is not good for America or for the rest of the world.
Fortunately, there remain leaders of erstwhile allies and partners who refuse to be bullied and who are prepared to stay the course for the sake of the well-being, not only of their own compatriots, but of all of humanity and of the planet we share. The president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, said today:
The European Union will not renegotiate the Paris Agreement [on climate change]. The 29 articles of the agreement must be implemented and not renegotiated. Climate action does not need more distractions. We have spent 20 years negotiating. Now it is the time for action. Now it is the time for implementation.
He affirmed that the US ‘abandonment’ will not mean the end of the agreement, but would make the world more united and determined to work towards the accord’s full implementation.
Because we must! If we care about our children and our grandchildren, we must! If we care about the planet with which we have been entrusted, we must!
Climate change is truly a global issue, an impending catastrophe to which all peoples contribute and by which all peoples will be impacted. Confronting its perils will require long-range thinking, coordinated effort, and common sacrifice. There is no better or worse “deal” to be found, for any given nation, for any given economy. There may not be nations, let alone economies, if we do not act now with resolve.
May the best hopes of European leaders like Hilda Heine, president of the Marshall Islands, be fulfilled that the nations of the world may “use the three years before the US pulls out of Paris to try to convince President Trump of the importance of climate action.” And may American recover some of its capacity for moral leadership, leading not by intimidation, but by example, not saying “me first,” but standing for liberty and justice and dignity and life for all.
this is our home
This is our home, the home we share, the home given us as a gift and a blessing by our Creator, the home entrusted to us to preserve and protect and enjoy.
This is our home! — the home we bequeath to our children and our grandchildren and to generations of children of God to come. And this home will feed them and enthrall them and delight them, too … if we care for it.
The new administration is proposing and enacting dramatic changes in governance on many fronts: a travel ban on immigrants and refugees from a few particular Muslim-majority nations, expanded deportation of undocumented residents, repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act, removing protections for transgender youth, ramping up the nuclear arms race, a budget that sharply increases defense spending and makes radical cuts to program and agencies that are intended to serve and protect the most vulnerable of our citizens.
But of all the newly implemented policies, one of the most disturbing to me is the virtual abandonment of environmental stewardship. Here’s an excerpt from a New York Times op-ed by William Ruckelshaus, who served as the first administrator of the newly-created Environmental Protection Agency from 1970-1973 and again as EPA administrator under Ronald Reagan from 1983-1985:
One of the factors leading to the creation of E.P.A. was the recognition that without a set of federal standards to protect public health from environmental pollution, states would continue to compete for industrial development by taking short cuts on environmental protection. The laws that the E.P.A. administers create a strong federal-state partnership that has worked well for over 40 years. The federal government sets the standards and the states enforce them, with the E.P.A. stepping in only if the states default on their responsibilities.
Budget cuts that hurt programs that states now have in place to meet those duties run the risk of returning us to a time when some states offered industries a free lunch, creating havens for polluters. This could leave states with strong environmental programs supported by the public at a competitive disadvantage compared to states with weak programs. In other words, it could lead to a race to the bottom.
A race to the bottom is a race to a despoiled home, a ruined planet. Environmental protection is not a partisan issue. Ruckelshaus is a Republican, a Reagan Republican. If you pit business against environment, both lose. Both lose! Gutting the EPA serves no useful purpose, no purpose at all, except for some small short term profit for a few resource-exploitive industries at the expense of long term disaster.
And gutting the EPA seems to be the goal. Here is a sampling of proposed cuts in the fiscal 2018 Trump budget taken from a OregonLive report:
Beach water quality testing
2016 budget – $9,500,000
2018 proposed – 0Diesel emissions reduction act
2016 budget – $50,00,000
2018 proposed – 0Radon testing
2016 budget – $6,000,000
2018 proposed – 0Environmental education
2016 budget – $8,700,000
2018 proposed – $555,000Chesapeake Bay
2016 budget – $73,000,000
2018 proposed – 5,000,000Puget Sound
2016 budget – $28,000,000
2018 proposed – 2,000.000Great Lakes restoration
2016 budget – $300,000,000
2018 proposed – 10,000.000Environmental justice
2016 budget – $6,700,000
2018 proposed – 1,500,000Climate protection
2016 budget – $95,000,000
2018 proposed – $29,000,000
In other words, the government of the people, by the people and for the people has no interest in cleaning up polluted swimming beaches, dirty air, and poisoned homes, and has no interest in preserving some of our nation’s natural gems like Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound, and the Great Lakes which account for 1/5 of the freshwater surface on the planet. There is no needed federal investment in preparing the next generation of good stewards of our precious natural resources and no interest in pursuing environmental justice, no interest in addressing the unbalanced impact of environmental degradation on vulnerable populations.
And climate change? The greatest looming threat to life in earth as we know it, undisputed by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists? We don’t need to worry about that. Making a few more bucks matters more. Right?
I pray that the administration will heed wise counselors like William Ruckelshaus and the will of the American people, the majority of whom who do care about preserving the environment (Gallup polling) even if the economy is adversely impacted, and do the right thing. This is our home!