E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The battle over climate change is heating up in Washington – as President Barack Obama’s nomination of Gina McCarthy to lead the Environmental Protection Agency sets the stage for a struggle over regulations intended to reduce carbon dioxide and other emissions.
A big part of McCarthy’s job, Obama said as he introduced her Monday at the White House, will be to ensure that “we’re doing everything that we can to combat the threat of climate change.”
In his inaugural address, Obama had already signaled that climate policy would be a high priority for his second term.
But Senate passage of a climate change bill that might impose new costs on the oil, coal and gas industries seems unlikely, especially since the Republican-majority House would be nearly certain to oppose any such effort.
President Barack Obama announces the nomination of Sylvia Mathews Burwell as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Obama also introduced Gina McCarthy as nominee to head the EPA and Ernest Moniz to take over the Energy Department.
Seeming to acknowledge this reality, Obama said in his State of the Union address, “I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.”
The EPA will be at the center of the climate change action.
Kyle Danish, a partner in the Van Ness Feldman law firm in Washington who specializes in climate change policy, said he expected McCarthy to face tough questioning during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. But he thinks it unlikely that Republicans will block her.
“Though McCarthy is by no means pro-industry, industry groups generally respect her and believe that she gives them a fair hearing,” Danish said.
Assuming she is confirmed, McCarthy can begin to try to transform Obama’s climate change rhetoric into regulatory reality.
“Of the four big priorities that the president is sketching out – climate change, the budget, gun control, and immigration, climate change is the one area where the president already has in existing law a lot of tools to address the problem,” said David Doniger, policy director for Climate and Clean Air at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), an environmental advocacy group. In its mission statement the NRDC says, “Climate change is the single biggest environmental and humanitarian crisis of our time.”
Ultimately, Doniger said, legislation will be needed to bring about deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, or carbon pollution, “but you can get a very big start on that under the Clean Air Act principally and under some of the energy efficiency laws.”
Doniger said power plants account for 40 percent of carbon emissions and “that’s where the EPA under Gina McCarthy will need to focus. As you look at where the carbon pollution comes from on the industrial side, the single largest thing is coal- and gas-burning power plants.” The NRDC has proposed a plan for using the Clean Air Act to cut that pollution by a third by 2025.
Larry Downing / Reuters
President Barack Obama nominates air quality expert Gina McCarthy to lead the Environmental Protection Agency on March 4, 2013 in Washington, D.C.
Last year, the EPA proposed a greenhouse gas emissions standard for most new power plants. “The proposed standard is set at the level of a natural gas-fired power plant,” Danish said. “As a result, it would be impossible for a new coal-fired power plant to meet unless it installed carbon capture and sequestration, which is not a generally available technology.”
Yet to be seen, he said, is whether the EPA will issue a final version of its rule on new power plants this spring, or whether it will withdraw and reconsider that proposal.
“The major undertaking will be development of regulations affecting existing power plants,” he said. “Some environmental organizations, such as NRDC and the World Resources Institute, have suggested that EPA could structure regulations that would achieve very substantial reductions from the power sector. However, the scope of the agency's regulatory authority under the relevant provisions of the Clean Air Act is unclear and untested in the courts.”
Many of EPA’s decisions end up having their fate determined by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The Clean Air Act of 1970 includes a provision that requires legal challenges to EPA standards of national scope to go only to the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
There are now four vacancies on that court, out of 11 authorized judgeships. The court has four judges appointed by presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, and three appointed by President Bill Clinton.
Due to Republican delay, Obama has not been able to appoint any judge to the D.C. Circuit Court. He has two nominations to that court pending before the Senate, those of Caitlin Halligan, who has already been approved but the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sri Srinivasan, who hasn’t yet gotten the committee’s approval.
“Every major EPA Clean Air Act regulation attracts a D.C. Circuit legal challenge -- often from both environmental groups and industry,” Danish said. “In addition, the scope of EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases is a still-evolving area. For this reason, Obama's nominees for D.C. Circuit judgeships could be as important for the fate of his climate policy as his nominee for EPA Administrator.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Monday that the Senate would vote on Halligan’s nomination this week. He will move for a cloture vote on Wednesday to end debate on her nomination.
“President Obama is the only president in the 65-year history of this court to not have a single judge confirmed to that court during his first term,” Reid complained on the Senate floor Monday. “The court desperately needs more judges.”
Taking the floor after Reid, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said that in some areas of the law, the D.C. Circuit court “is more important than the Supreme Court because on so many of the issues that go there, they will have the final word. The Supreme Court will never hear all the requests for appeals from the D.C. Circuit.”
He added, “It’s extraordinarily important that we have a balanced court there.”
This story was originally published on Mon Mar 4, 2013 7:50 PM EST
Leave a Comment:
I quote "energy prices will have to rise".
Get ready middle class for a VERY BIG tax increase.
Man, the anti clean air righties are gonna be all over this one like bad breath...
They like to fart but not clean up the wind...
Is there really climate change...or just the climate going through natural cycles?
Anyway, corporations should pay carbon taxes, so we can study all these...
green energy can create new jobs too...at least cleaner..with fresher air...more jobs...better new tech...
all for a good cause.
And it will all be passed on to the consumer in higher prices. The companies don't lose. The consumer does. The rich liberals will do fine. The middle class and poor will suffer.
Corporations won't pay. They will pass the bill down to the consumer. The poor and middle class always pays for the regulations.
Another great Progressive selection by the East Wing of the White House.
Mr. and Mrs. "Drama" Obamas are at it again.
I wonder what they are teaching their children behind closed doors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only bad breath comes from the left.....wait a minute....that wasn't "breath".
Heya Piggy.....break out your wallet.....this administration is coming after you this time. Remember, piggies dodo causes Global Warming.
Aren't living organisms supposed to change? Why not Earth?
That's why Obo The Clown will never push his so-called green agenda. Even he knows, everyone (even the sheeple who blindly vote for libs every single time) will have to pay more for energy. Unless he can figure out a way to pay for it solely by taxing the rich, he's not going to lose his Obama Claus moniker over this.
Dr, is your diaper wet again?!
Kleenex and Depends corporations thank right wingNUTS for their increased business after losing not one, but two Presidential elections to an African-American. Today's hateful, pea-brained Republicans lost the Presidency to an African-American: Lincoln would be proud...sort of. Today's Republicans are the antithesis of Abraham Lincoln.
you got that wrong its the libitards that crap their pants when they see one of those evil guns. we arent against green energy. just let the market forces play in developing it. that way if it works it is a real bargain not a gov.com sponsored boondoggle like solyndra
If the black bast-rd can just use executive action, then wtf do we even have a constitution for, or a senate and house of reps....f--k this pos potus and his chickensh-t policies....
They want to do what?!?!?! Research it?!?!?!! HOW DARE THEY?! Everyone knows research or science has never brought about any good.
Personally I don't know if climate change is a threat or BS. Everyone posting here who is so certain climate change is imaginary, why are you so against studying it? What if we find out that it is indeed imaginary, wouldn't that be a good thing? You should call for research to settle the matter once and for all, but instead you all just sit there calling it BS without anything to back it up.
Republicans obstructing and failing to do their jobs again......surely not!
Is "save the planet" worth the destruction of American industrial capacity ?
Get ready everyone for environment disaster to protect big oil and the GOP.
Climate change or not - conservatives will find a way to gang up on anything that is public good and keeps corporations in check.
So are those of you who are in opposition saying we should continue to destroy the environment, because global warming is a hoax?
Makes me think about a neighbor who when I was a kid would pull his car up to a sewer and change his oil.
The only post worth reading here (so far) is the one TrollHarder just [ut up. Makes sense, to the point and proveable. Thanks Troll.
Trollharder: You call Obama the divider in chief I assume based on raising taxes 4.5% on the rich. Please enlighten us to his other policies that are so divisive.
Reagan raised taxes 11 times and was never called devisive. What's different about Obama?
Ryans plan would have eliminated many middle class taxpayers tax breaks costing us several thousand a year. Why is raising taxes, cutting benefits or ending deductions for the middle class a sign of fiscal responsibility yet any applied to the wealthy is based on hate, greed and envy?
Most Americans think the party that calls any woman needing an abortion a slut divisive.
Or a presidential candidate that calls 47% of the country handouters which include the elderly on social security and many military. Anyone who reads any political threads see constant hate directed for anyone not paying taxes regardless of cause. Isn't that divisive?
Which party is it that would deny equal rights to gays and constantly bash Hispanics? Isn't spreading hate for those who aren't white like yourself divisive? Maybe you need a less biased dictionary.
Yes his post makes perfect sense to anyone who believes every thing wrong with our country Obama's responsible for. Those who remember Bush's legacy of wars, massive debt, an economy in meltdown, millions facing foreclosure and unemployment reaching 10% while still under his budget might see it differently. As did the majority who re elected him and popularity ratings exceeding what they were before the election.
What kind of depraved mentality makes a person fight for more pollution? What kind of hate makes a person fight against progress? What is wrong with these people on the right? why do that hate their fellow man so much? This mental disorder of the right wing is destroying America. We really need to give them half the land and let them have their own hell.
Has it occurred to any here that the population explosion on the planet, but particularly in the United States, is causing more harm from the alleged "warming" than any other source? It's basic. Test: When we breathe, what do we exhale? Yep. Astronomically more than any other source.
The exponential increase in population is killing us; the inventions and corporations serve the population. And yet Obama wants to give "Amnesty" to people who break our laws by sneaking over our borders in droves.
We cannot afford supporting the world and giving amnesty to the law-breakers from other countries plunging here for our fabled Streets of Gold. And Obama has recently freed terrorists from jail?
And Liberals think those of us with legitimate American ancestry who are out of work should go fly a kite? All the hullabaloo about Global Warming being caused by driving cars! Goodness what ignorance. People drive cars. People crave oil. People delight in Ticky Tacky Techy Toys. But most of all people breathe... and exhale Carbon Dioxide in massive volumes.
And ignorant people who want free rides and suborn those of us who worked hard and obeyed the laws of the eras we and our ancestors legitimately arrived in this land... deport them back to their own countries.
We've run out of gas... especially theirs.
Larry-367607
TrollHarder, it appears; is just a misinformed low information person that believes everything he sees, hears or reads in the conservative media.
That's a favorite line of congress woman Bachmann and that idiot ex-republican congressman West from Florida. She started saying that the day Obama was elected.
Favorite line of people that blame the so called liberal media for not bashing Obama.
Calling someone a Communist is a favorite pass time of people on the right. TrollHarder is one of those people that refuse to recognize that due to (1)the continuing Bush tax cuts has cost over$1 trillion, (2)the Bush national prescription drug program projected cost $100 billion/year, (3)Bush Iraq war cost over $1 trillion, (4)The economy crashed causing a huge lost of tax revenue (Obama's fault), (4)the national debt was $10,669,804,864,612, and the yearly budget was already over $1 trillion the day Obama took office. The interest on that debt was over $100 billion/year. With all of that on his shoulders, the budget has decreased every year that Obama has been in office. I guess TrollHarder wanted the president to immediately cut that trillion dollar budget in half the day he took office.
The typical rant of a of a person who has nothing constructive to say.
This is the rant of many a person who simply did not like the president from the start and is accusing him of being a divider when it is they who are the dividers.
There has been volumes written on this subject. Suggest TrollHarder read some of them.
PS: Question for TrollHarder; Who is us?
I think the answer is simple, you can't get rid of the EPA without approval of both houses of Congress. So, the only alternative is for the House to reach agreement with the Senate that will stop Obama from using the EPA for purposes which were not intended. If that can't be done, then the House should refuse to pass any legislation that funds the agency. You fools on the left, you should know that this has nothing to do with climate change, global warming, saving the planet, or anything other than Obama telling you and everyone else what to do. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that Obama knows the climate change stuff is nothing more than a tool to get the ignorant wimps of the left on his side. And the fact is that not one of you on the left really believes in this global warming BS either. How do I know? Well, not one of you have complained of you Messiah flying all over the place to play golf and contributing to global warming, climate change or whatever. Nor have you complained about all the destruction (if you really do believe) that is caused by the phony believers at all these so-called global warming conferences. Again, damage the earth so you can talk about how you shouldn't damage the earth. As I've said before, a wise man once said, if you want to find out the truth, turn off the volume and watch what they do. And what they do clearly shows they don't believe in the message they are preaching. Come to think of it, that is pretty much the case for almost everything the left peddles.
Interesting. The energy sector (coal, oil, gas) actually likes McCarthy. They call her 'very reasonable' and 'willing to change regulations based on their input'.
Are these comments just a knee-jerk reaction, or do any of you have a specific complaint about McCarthy? Because even Big Oil-funded climate denier James Inhofe supports her.
And, of course, energy prices are dropping dramatically under Obama. For example:
Electricity Declines 50% as Shale Spurs Natural Gas Glut: Energy
As for human-caused climate change, yes - of course it's real. That hasn't been questioned in scientific circles for decades now. You may as well question evolution and Germ Theory, too.
To see how real climate change is I say we compare the enviormentalist scientists predictions.
Manhattan was supposed to be under 4 feet of water from rising ocean levels last year. Nope didn't happen
We were supposed to need gas masks to walk around our nations cities in the early 70's nope didn't happen.
We were supposed to see an increase of 4 degrees Fahrenheit world wide, nope didn't happen.
The ozone layer over Antarctica was supposed to completely disappear. opps, got better.
Hum, what exactly have they gotten correct?
Time after time these predictions don't pan out.
One thing for sure, with all the bashing Bush took from liberals over his supposedly crony capitalism among energy producers, they are making far more with Obama in the White House. Unfortunately the only promise Obama has kept is that under his plan energy prices would naturally skyrocket. Obama took office and gasoline took off, and has never looked back. Climate change experts have proven themselves to be professional guessers, and so far not very good at it. But Obama believes, or he has friends that believe, or he has friends that will profit, and that is what this is all about.
Humans are part of the equation too, but
Howmuch is the possibility to reduce our share in the weather change knowing that the world population is 6,984,895,594 people.
What will be the difference in weather change if reduce our share, knowing that the weather will change, regardless
The only thing I worry is the pollution, of our air water and soil , I don't care about the weather change , there is nothing we can do. We are living in a warm period in an ice age , it last thousand of years. Humankind is just a micro part in the existence of the planet, and weather change always exist.
Government just look for more ways to get more revenue, going to absurd trying to tax the foot print of our animals.
More regulations related to weather change are push by people like Gore who make millions with the carbon business. But he is so hypocrite that he sell his TV Chanel to an Oil Producer.
Common denier talking point. Hansen was asked what the world will be like when atmospheric CO2 levels doubled. He said the West Side Highway would be underwater.
He did not predict that the Manhattan would be under 4 feet of water in 20 years. Period.
Bob Reiss reports the conversation as follows:
James Hansen reports the conversation as follows:
Has CO2 doubled, Ted?
Your other points are equally twisted.
Sure Physicist-Retired, that $4.00 /gallon gas that I had to buy to fill my car's gas tank is a dramatic drop in my energy bill.
Of course, you could be referring to the fracking process for natural gas, but with the EPA's help, the Obama adminstration will see to it that a cheap source of energy to heat American's homes in the winter is stopped.
That has already been tested in other countries. EX: East and West Germany (Post WWII), and currently North and South Korea.
I am actually going to agree with a Progressive person here. I would be in favor of splitting the nation in two equal parts, as long as the wall is high enough that I could enjoy my "Hell" of Liberty and prosperity without you. I hope that you would enjoy your Socialist redistributionist welfare state (similar to East Germany before the wall was torn down), which would regulate you into a Bloomberg utopian coma.
We might have been gullible enough to believe you 30 years ago. Your entire party is bought and paid for by the likes of the Koch brothers, and we know how they feel about the environment.
larry-367,
Another brain-dead clown parroting "Bush did it! Bush did it! Bush did it!". Ok, if Bush did it what the hell has your dumbass "leader" done (and will take reponsibility for) other then proving he is the LEAST compromising president in history.
Oh nuts, I am wrong! He can take (but won't, of course) responsibility for creating the "denial theory of government". The foundation of his governing theory is "If it is said, it can be denied. If it is on video, it can be denied. And if it is on any other media, it can be denied. And if you ask me to admit to this theory I will deny it."
Obama can take pride in developing a new "math" for children. It goes like this: 1 + 1 = 2, 2 + 2 = 4, 3 + 3 = 6. So far his new math is really nothing new. But what it comes to big numbers it falls apart. When his new math gets to numbers like 2,000 or 3,000 his math says that they are more like hundreds. Maybe he's one of those poor unfortunates that were taught the finger method of math. You know, the one that goes: the index finger is all that matters. The sad part of this is that the Department of Homeland Security has been officially designated "ground zero application for his new math.
Gee, another tax from the White House. How ODD!!!!!!
And if Mr. Obama cannot get his "Carbon Tax" passed through Congressional legislation, he will use:
Remember what he stated during his Progressive SOTU speech. He has to cover all his Progressive spending agenda somehow.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW: Mr. Obama friends, and Mr. Alberto Gorie, are jumping up and down with joy at the Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX) counting on those TAXES. Gee....they sell something for nothing and get BILLIONS of DOLLARS.
IDO: The UN black helicopters are coming for you, dude! You people have more conspiracy theories than there are stars in the universe. Yet, none of them come true. You just continue dreaming up new ones and forget the old. hahahahahahahahaha You people haven't won the popular vote in a presidential election but once since 1988! SINCE 1988! Good God! Are you ever going to learn that foolish conspiracy theories won't sell anyplace but FOX, the Right Wing Propaganda Network?
Faux!
Yep, those "pesky" conspiracy theories are something else, that is.....UNLESS THEY ARE TRUE:
Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX)....selling nothing for BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.....complements of Maurice Strong, Mr. Obama, and Mr. Gorie.
Wait a minute....the Progressive's heads spins like crazy when anyone mentions.....TRUTH.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey DUDE....get out from under that Progressive mushroom.
Executive orders by President: Looks to me like Obama is on the low end.
Woodrow Wilson
1,803
Warren G. Harding
522
Calvin Coolidge
1,203
Herbert Hoover
968
5075 - 6070
Franklin D. Roosevelt
3,522
6071 - 9537
Harry S. Truman
907
9538 - 10431
Dwight D. Eisenhower
484
10432 - 10913
John F. Kennedy
214
10914 - 11127
Lyndon B. Johnson
325
11128 - 11451
Richard Nixon
346
11452 - 11797
Gerald R. Ford
169
11798 - 11966
Jimmy Carter
320
11967 - 12286
Ronald Reagan
381
12287 - 12667
George Bush
166
12668 - 12833
William J. Clinton
364
12834 - 13197
George W. Bush
291
13198 - 13488
Barack Obama
147
13489 - 13635...
Totals
You won't see that list on Faux.
Don't be too hard on republicans, they are just saying what they are told to say. They are just believing what they are told to believe.
Don't be too hard on Democrats, that are just repeating what they are told to say. They are just believing that they are told to believe.
Nice try. As you know but fail to mention, any binding agreement between the United States and any foreign government or group of foreign governments must be ratified by the US Congress. But go ahead and put out FOX talking points...I'm sure your fellow RWNJs will believe it.
I am with Obama on this. I want $9 gas. I want the economy to collapse. I want companies to continue hording their money. I want everyone's electric bill to go up. I want everything we buy to get more expensive. I want unemployment to stay over 8% and higher.
Mr. Obama's agenda has done everything you said except for the cost of gas....and it won't be too long before it hits Chu's magic number of $9/gallon.
JobSeeker
Sounds like the Republican platform last year.
@Louie.....You are more right than you can imagine. Obama has copied every Bush policy. Patriot Act, Gitmo, tax cuts for the wealthy, corporate bailouts, lobbyists in the White House, open borders, corporate money influence, deficit spending, killied 881 civilians, 176 children and 1387 injured in Pakistan drone attacks, Medicare expansion, even brags that he is drilling more than Bush. Not exactly hope and change, unless you are a homosexual.
Oil companies can't raise prices simple because costs go up as too much of our oil is imported. That's why when prices drop they shut down less productive wells. I worked in the oil industry 40 years.
Obama is far less liberal then many in the house and senate and many past presidents yet the right wing paints him as a screaming socialist, commie etc. I wonder what's different about him?
When Jimmy Charter suggested a policy that would move America towards energy independence the republicans began to demonize him. When a small tax was suggested to fund research and exploration the republicans went nuts. He wanted to put money into shale oil. they said it was not feasible. (take note that shale oil is booming today). We would have had use of shale oil decades ago. But that would have hurt the Saudi Family and it's vast fortunes. And the right wing just would not have it.
A tiny tax in Jimmy Carters time would have avoided the high costs of fuel we now pay. New highways would also have been built with it's funding. Instead, Thanks to republicans, we pay 4 bucks for gas on highways that are too congested to travel half the time.
Taxes are not the problem, how they are spent is the problem. they give gov. money to highly profitable oil companies instead of investing it in America. I do believe that Republicans hate America for it's freedom. they really really suck.
You want your Grandchildren to not be able to breathe the air.
Nice overview of recent history, George. Thanks.
It's worth mentioning that Republicans stopped all efforts to address energy here in the 1970s, but Europe actually acted. After 30 years of progress, they now rely heavily on renewables (Denmark will get half of it's electricity from wind, water, and solar in just 7 years, and Germany is actively getting rid of all fossil fuel energy sources).
In the meantime, we'll be paying for the Oil Wars for decades, and still face stiff opposition every time we try to act on realistic, sustainable energy policies.
This is simply embarrassing.
You are a typical TeaPublican..."I got mine, F*** the rest of you (including my kids and grand kids)" The price of gasoline today is so much more important to you than whether or not you kids and future generations can even inhabit this planet.
that's a nice straw man argument you've concocted for yourself...
Just think, we are going to pay for this while the the emerging powers get a get out of jail free card(China,India and Brazil) pass GO.
Did you notice the recent "smog" pictures in Beijing ?
Some opinionaters are blaming "dust storms".....HA.
Canada holds a stealth get out of jail card. They produce sour crude and sell it to us or the highest bidder. They don't pollute at home because they have only 31 million people, but they produce 3.7 million barrels of oil per day. They sit in front of their computers calling everyone else polluters and brag how environmentally friendly they are.
Yea but we're fat stupid americans.
What do we know?
hey jobseeker do you always display your stupidity so blatantly. what a pea brained asswipe. canada has shale oil and tar sands oiil. do you know anything about the oil patch. i do and you sir are like a rare chinese flower. the blloming idiot. go bury your nose up obozos butt and leave the educated people alone
75th,
You're right to berate jobseeker for his ignorance regarding shale oil, and ESPECIALLY tar sands. Mining of the tar sands is the most environmentally destructive form of harvesting fossil fuels ever devised by the mind of man. Your Faux News description of Obama shows that you have zero comprehension of who is doing his best to look out for our environmental future.
Why do you fools continue to fight against environmental programs that may cost you a little bit, when they can probably save your children from an intolerable future of Global Warming and loss of habitat?
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/20122117544271875.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/20122573637355357.html
Canada was fracking long before it became a household word in the US. I was offered a job to go to Alberta in the early 90's to bid on a fracking project. Canada has long been a major top 5 oil producer, but it really accelerated in the early 90's because they desperately needed money for their "free" healthcare system beginning with the Canada Health Act of 1984. Greed disguised as free healthcare. Do you know that healthcare takes up 67% of Canada's annual budget? No wonder they need all that oil. Canada's motto should be "Will Pollute for Healthcare".
Jobseeker: You lie. Actual comparisons are below. Canada holds down the costs because single payer has far more leverage than our system. Our government pays 23% more in government programs than Canada.
@Larry.....Nice job of copy and pace from Wikipedia. If you do actual research, you'll find the truth. I read the entire Wiki page. The numbers are based on studies by groups with an agenda. Here are hard numbers you cannot fudge.
The annual budget in Canada is $275 billion. The portion of that used for healthcare is a whopping $185 billion or 67% of the budget. Since there are 31 million people in Canada, that comes out to $6,000 per person. That is $18,000 per year spent on healthcare for a family of three. I don’t pay that much. Do you?
Larry, the first thing I noted was that jobseeker is referring to Canada's annual budget and you are referring to Canada's GDP. They are NOT the same. Let's get our units straight here
Rubbish. From Wiki:
No country in the world spends as much on healthcare as the U.S. Yet Americans are number 40 in terms of life expectnacy - behind Cuba, Portugal, and Slovenia.
Sigh. Just as the economy starts to get on it's feet it appears the Obama wants to throw a monkey wrench into the works... Can't he ever let anything settle before he stirs things up again?
You'd like to pay a lot more money, later, to clean up crap that we're spewing today? Smooth move.
LOL, Let's blow up our economy now then. Then we can go back to burning wood to stay warm. Smooth move.
Tetrapoda,
They want to pay a lot more money, later, when it will be too late to save our planet.
Gneisenau,
Your pronouncement is not even worthy of response. How the heck are we going to burn wood to stay warm when the planet has been completely deforested, fool?
Still plenty of trees where I live. If the economy blows up shortly and I've got nothing else then I'm burning them to keep warm. You can do what you want.
Your car, water heater and kitchen stove burns wood? How medieval.
he's either a troll or an idiot. take your pick, because most trolls are idiots. lol The economy is improving because of great leadership. it didn't just happen. And why would you want your kids to be sick? why would you want the planet to suffer. just to defend the right wing hate? i figured so.
Gneisenau -- Apres moi, le deluge?
You don't care how hard life will be for your children and grand-children as long as you are lolling in comfort.
Jimmy Carter's pet project Dakota Gasification, Beulah, ND is now a ferilizer plant. Obama's pet project Solyndra, Fremont, CA will be used as a ferilizer warehouse??
Another Obama minion that will push for regulations that wiil continue the destruction of our economy. I weep for our country.
And I weep at the thought your mother raised a dolt.
better than an asswipe uneducatedobozo asskisser
Hey 75th, who let you out?
Steve, i guess your are forgetting who's policies just pulled us out of the hole your right wingers got us into. lol For four years your kind has cried how Obama is hurting America, and for four years the economy has improved. Funny how the guy you called socialist has built capitalism back up. the trade deficit is down 20% the dow is just over 14k from the Bush 7k. pretty much doubled. so which are you? a troll or just another brain washed fool?
The right wing had two "worst nightmares". First was a black president. the second was a black president that was successful. Looks like both fears came true. Now how on earth will you teach your kids and Grand kids that black people can't accomplish great things with Obama being so successful?
Ans: you can try, but it wont be easy. Very few of the next generations will be like you. the progressive mentality grows. the ignorance shrinks. I Just wish it didn't take so long. But slow is better then never.
george -- One of these days the "right wingers" will discover that Obama is half White, then he will be a great man
>Kyle Danish, a partner in the Van Ness Feldman law firm in Washington who specializes in climate change policy, said he expected McCarthy to face tough questioning during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. But he thinks it unlikely that Republicans will block her.
Goody, more opportunities for Republican senators to demonstrate their ignorance...
Hell, everyone expects the poorly educated, sorry assed, far right wing, extremist, fanatics to go nuts on this one. Why is anyone surprised? These people haven't got a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of, and they're going to make damn sure the rest of us live in the cesspools of their social and physical environments.
And everyone expects the brain-damaged, mentally unstable, deadbeat parasite Obama ubsequious sychophants to have their nose up his butt no matter what hair-brained idiocy he pulls and no matter what damage he does to the people of this country or the economy....
For the past 16 years the global temperature has dropped.
So please explain to me why Obama is so fit to be tied to jack up my utilities rates near double for a non existent problem?
The supposed consensus of warmers was a grand total of 77 scientist.....
Arctic ice is near an all time normal
Antarctic ice is at a record high
And locust are not a sign of climate change and snow either.... It's weather.
The facts http://climatedepot.com/
One last minor detail
CO2 is plant food. No CO2 no plants and no animals including us.
CO2 is a minor player in global climate seems the sun is the major player and we cannot control it.
Aunt Anna: hahahhahahahahahahahaha Where in hell did you get that information??!!?? Have you passed the GED yet??!!??
I can back all of it up so please prove me wrong.
plus a record high level of polar bears. oops the left said they all drowned
you go aunt. you are spot on but wait dont press to hard or the libertards will call you a racist and run away
If you look at data the right way, you can draw any conclusions you want.
You are full of ___, Aunt, prove me wrong, lets see your proof.
Anna and 75th, a match made in hell
Aunt Ana,
Please send me the recipe for your electric coolaid. Have you been main lining Faux News drivel directly into your veins? The grand consensus of global climate scientists is 95% of ALL of them agreeing on the fact that we are the source of Global Warming, and that we have very little time to save the planet.
I know you can't be doing LSD, because that generally puts you more in tune with what's really going on in nature, so it must be one of the new "Designer" drugs.
The global temperature has NOT dropped, Arctic ice is retreating every year, Greenhouse gasses are the largest contributor to global warming since the Dinosaurs ruled the Earth.
I've seen the data with my own eyes. All of the lines drawn from left to right, each going down, with the conclusion that temperatures have gone down each of the last 10 years. However, it is clear to a kindergarten kid looking at the same data that the temperatures are going up.
"Anna" go to the following site "Skeptical Science: Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism" EVERY one of the items on the climate change denier list you posted are addressed on the Skeptical Science site and COMPLETELY debunked with research and scientific FACT. Climate Depot is a conservative site that has been debunked continously. NOBODY has been able to debunk the Skeptical Science site.
Ok: If you want to play word games and say Greenland isn't the arctic fine but Greenland alone has enough ice to raise sea levels 4 or 5 feet. Any idea how many cities would be under water?
Another Republican for Science Genius.
Anna,
If you really believe those things, you've been seriously misled. Let me know which one you want to discuss, and I'll be happy to explain the science to you. Not a laundry list, because each is complicated. Pick one. We'll go from there.
So many doomsday predictions from these "Scientists" that never pan out. Where's the 4 degree rise in temperature? Where's the 6 foot rise in ocean levels? These were all predicted to happen in 2010 and hum.. Nothing.. Why isn't Manhattan under 4 feet of water? I'll tell you why, they were wrong. Just like we were told that by the late 70's and early 80's we'd need gas masks to walk around our cites. Just a bunch of bad predictions and nothing really ever happens. How about that reappearing ozone layer? What are you guys predicting today? Lets see if even one prediction comes to pass.
Watch what the left wing nutjobs and the media ridicule... objective science, for one... know why there's not been a honest climate debate? the left can't stand scrutiny of their bogus models and omitted data to "prove" their hair-brained claims that people are the driving factor in climate change... IPCC emails prove they cooked their data... only the Libtard idiots intent on driving the cost of energy up continue to believe the bogus claims
their hysterical "conservatives what dirty air and water" is the trademark of obfuscation from real data...
The link that Aunt Anna provided is a group financed by Exxon Mobile, Chevron and Chrysler. How does it feel to be a duped by Corporate America Anna? Did you notice that our corn and soy corps basically failed last year? Did you happen to notice that New York subways were flooded for the first time ever? I'm sure that these sites never mention the fact that we are pumping 80,000 pounds of CO2 into the air every day, treating the atmosphere like an open sewer. We need to pull our heads out of the sand and realize climate change is more important than any manufactured debt crisis or the financial well being of the major energy corporations.
Same freaking arguments by the right. We CAN'T do gun control because we can't stop all deaths. We CAN"T reduce oil and gas tax breaks because prices will go up (guess what folks, the industry is making trillions and you still get high prices), and we CAN'T impose regulations on the energy industry because prices will go up. You ever live downwind of a coal fired power plant? I have, and you can see the air you breath. Water is becoming more polluted with run off from big agribusiness, fracking appears to contribute to livestock die off and pollution, rivers and lakes are being pollutied with coal ash and other by products. The real bottom line is that clean air and clean water will soon be a luxury if regulations are not put in place and enforced.
Woodbutcher I do agree but make the rest of the worlds govs agree.
We can't do gun control because it is against our second amendment.
But if you want we can just declare Obama your god and leader and let him decide who lives and dies. If you want to piss all over the constitution then move the @!$%# to China you liberal prick.
the tax breaks the oil co. get are the right to write off dry holes production costs. same as business loss. they spend an average of 28 million to find,drill and deliver gas to the pumps for an 9 cent a gallon profit. yet the gov gets over a dollar off that gallon. so whos raping who. check the facts. then quit drinking the kool aid
you are so wrong its ridiculous
Really 75th prove he is wrong.. Otherwise your the true idiot that loves propaganda.
Aunt, or we could worship the NRA and bow down to a golden AK47 with a 30-round clip and armor piercing ammunition. Everyone can worship in the cemetery of their choice.
The right will still be screaming about the waste of money our government spends on renewable energy until the last barrel is pumped. Then they'll be blaming our democratic president in 50 years for not having enough foresight to address it.
Oil company propogande for the ignorant. They sell the gas they refined from their own oil and then tell their stations they can only charge 9 cents over what they sold it to them. When oil companies produce and sell their own oil it's all profit as are refining profits. But you keep focusing on what they allow station owners to mark it up. When oil companies have thousands of wells that paid for themselves years ago how can they only profit 9 cents with oil at $100?
Why do you Obama puppets ignore facts? One of the first "global warming" chicken littles was Rajendra Pachuri, the head of the UN weatheragency. Last week he issued a statement saying that there has been no global warming in 17 years. He said that the UK weather Office has confirmed it.
When the hysteria started, John Coleman, a noted meteorologist issued a statement backed upby 900 of his peers, most of whom were PHDs, that there was no global warming. One of the clomate chane jokes is the 98% of scientists agree thet ther is global warming. The 98% figure was the result of the University of Illinopis sending out hundredes of letters asking scientists about global warming. They got 19 replies. Seventeen said yes, ergo 98% . If you people had a good memory, ytou would remember that most of the climate change alarmists warne3d u8s 30 years that we were facing a new "Ice Age". I'm still waiting.
We have enough oil reserves for over 500 years now. That ols "we're going to run out" nonsense has been debunked. Scientists are formulating how the earth is turning carbon deposits into oil near the mantel and pushing it up through the faults. Arguably, if they are right, we have basically unlimited supplies.
1 more little factoid for you all
Due to the fracking a lot of coal power plants have converted to natural gas for the simple reason it's cheaper to burn then coal at the moment. US CO2 is now at 2005 levels that meets the stupid UN Accord. China is the polluter and we are not stropping that.
This will not be good I for one have not seen a pay raise for 4 years yet food and everything is more costly. I cannot absorb Obamas huge money grab with carbon taxes. He really doesn't give a damn for working folks it's so obvious now. Only the rich have benefited with OBAMA.
The rich and the poor. And the middle class takes it on the chin because "everyone deserves a fair chance"
yep lets all quit. then the deadbeats would cry. no more obozo phones
The rich get rich and the poorer get poorer, in the mean time, in between time, don't we have fun. attacking each other on the internet?
You think things are expensive now, wait until nothing will grow and you are eating plastic food.
Aunt Anna,
China has just enacted the firs Carbon penalties of the world's major polluters, while the U.S. continues to whine that we cannot afford to stop polluting. We are, by far, the largest polluters on the planet, so quit your bitching and try paying your fair share for a better future for our children, creep.
Biker you trust China?
Obama huge money grab? DMMLMAO
Do some research Aunt, the money has been moving to the top for the past 20 years while wages have stagnated. CEO's pulling down billions while wage earners can bearly still put food on the table and you knocking Obama for trying to get the rich to pay a little more in taxes. The republicans are blocking everything he is trying to do create jobs for the people who drive the economy. You are carrying the flag of the people who are trying to keep you in the ditch. That's called self destruction on your part.
The USA is no longer the biggest polluter. Furthermore, don't count the USA as one country, do it by state please. That way we're comparing apples to apples.
I'm so glad that the young collage grads voted for Obama. He couldn't have won without your vote. Now you get to pay for his folly all the rest of your lives. Here we live on a sea of oil and Obama burning corn and building windmills.
That is your future.
Using my tax $$$ to do it too.
aworld.....He isn't using your tax dollars. He is tax dollars from today's kindergartners.
Bill H-1430012,
Why don't you get your facts straight before you run off at the mouth. There has been a greater increase in domestic oil production under Obama than under any Repukian president to date.
Sing that is a twist. Oil production did go up but in spite of Obama not because of him. That oil increase came from private wells on private land.
No they'll be paying for Bush. Their grankids will have to cover Obama's.
Not true. The biggest increase was offshore until the blowout which actually caused declines. North Dakota is our other big area and Obama's done nothing to restrict production.
Try fact check Larry-367607
If you dispute my comment you fact check it.
If Barry will just stop talking global temperature would decrease by 10 degrees
Oblunder is the only person I have ever heard of that had to have his teeth capped because of wind erosion....
I have read a few people talking about corporations need to pay more for clean air. Let me say this, every time a regulation demands that a corporation pay fees for whatever, that company does not pay; the cost is passed along to the consumers.
People will never get that. They always figure someone else will pay for it and never themselves.
It depends on the industry. Retail can simply raise prices, commodities like oil, corn, whet etc. are priced at the world level. I haven't seen anyone supporting regulation demand it be without cost.
Less is more my friend. Less is more.
why do we let these @!$%#s decide our future. we need to cut gov't in half so that only useful programs are left to the federal government
Define "useful," we may cut very different things.
All those young 20 year olds have a very rude awakening waiting for them when they leave mommy and daddy's house....Fu-k Em all!!!!....
Just what the economy needs is the epa with more power. I guess what I people say is correct is epa stands for the emploument prevention agency. Obama want even more controls. Can this guy fail the middles class anymore
Lets tripple electricity cost in the middle of a crippling recession and shoot ourselves in the foot while China and India burn the hell out of coal. China has non EPA and we gave them a pass with the Kyoto Protocol. They can burn it but we can't. Now if Obama can figure out how to keep Chinese Pollution over China, crippling our economy and turning us into a third world country might make sense!
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/03/02/doomed-arctic-has-the-most-ice-in-five-years/
Arctic Ice today
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/ice-area-sets-another-record-high/
Antarctica is the highest ever for the date, and the fifth highest daily value on record.
Global Temperature Standstill Gains UN IPCC Support: IPCC chair Pachauri 'has acknowledged the reality of the post-1997 standstill in' global temps http://www.thegwpf.org/global-temperature-standstill-gains-ipcc-support/
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/01/paper-finds-sun-controls-climate-gives.html
Paper finds the Sun controls climate & 'gives no support to theory of anthropogenic climate change'
This is for TJefferson-1649275 Refute my evidence you blooming warming religious zealot.
Thank You...but please realize that fact has no place in their world...the operate on pure emotion...............
You should be absoutely embarrassed to mention Steven Goddard as a scientific resource. He has been debunked more times than butter has been put on toast. As for resources try EDF.org or national geographic or any of the hundreds of sources that use scientific evidence. I'm probably wasting my breath because Aunt Anna is probably just a paid front man for some oil conglomerate.
Where does Barry find these old hags. Can't we get a director or a secretary that has at least a modicum of looks and maybe a few curves? C'mon...throw us a bone. Or do only the ugly ones get the job done?
So maybe, Lindsey Lohan for EPA Director?
The President is going to drag the nay-saying Republicans out into the open.
A political party cannot survive when it's claims oppose the scientific community.
This is just one of many topics that Republicans are wrong about; and everyone can see that but them.
Your scientific community of paid by grant to get a result of a certain type that has been caught fudging data for the bast 16 years... Get real
Your consensus was 77 total scientist... LOOK IT UP.
Hanson admitted no warming for 5 years
UN IPCC for 10 years no warming
And all your climate models have proven they are junk. Garbage data in garbage data out.
Not one model reflects current temperatures IPCC admits that.
I have a suggestion for you. Keep the environmental faked out group science out of your IPCC reports. Lock up Hanson for faking temperature data. And we need to start prosecuting the entire lot of you for fraud.
Your fake CO2 alarmist theory has cost the world untold amounts of money.
and; if you are wrong?
She is wrong. And it has been proven on a consistent basis. Including her BS that the consensus was "77 scientists" look it up", the "fudging of data, and so on. Aunt Anna is a conservative shill who embodies EVERYTHING negative when it comes to conservatives who refuse to listen to facts and scientific evidence. For example on UN IPCC from Skeptical Science:
Does the IPCC accurately report the findings of science?
"The IPCC was formed to report on a broad range of scientific enquiries into the climate, and our effects on it, and to summarise the science for laypeople. The science they summarise is published so it is simple to compare the primary science with the IPCC reports, and compare both to what actually took place."
There are numerous instances where the IPCC reports, which are summaries of published climate change science, have understated the case - hardly suggesting exaggeration in pursuit of an agenda. Here are some examples:
• CO2 output from fossil fuels: observed emissions are close to the worst-case projections made by the IPCC, despite them offering a range of potential emission scenarios. (In fact, atmospheric CO2 is increasing ten times faster than any rate detected in ice core data over the last 22,000 years).
• Sea-level rise is accelerating faster than the IPCC predicted. Actual sea-level rise is 80% higher than the median IPCC projection. By 2100 sea-level rise was predicted by the IPCC to be in the range of 18-59 cm. It is now believed that figure may be far too low, because estimates of contributions from Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps were excluded from AR4 because the data was not considered reliable. (This omission hardly supports the notion that the IPCC seeks to exaggerate global warming trends).
• Each Arctic summer, sea-ice is melting faster than average predictions in the last IPCC report. The Arctic is experiencing a long-term loss of multi-year ice which is also accelerating.
• The body of scientific literature has consistently shown that human greenhouse gas emissions are responsible for more global surface warming than has been observed over the past half century, whereas the IPCC only says that greenhouse gases are responsible for "most" observed warming over this timeframe.
In many similar cases, the evidence suggests that changes in climate are occurring faster, and with more intensity, than the IPCC have predicted. It is not credible to suggest the reports were biased in favour of the theory of anthropogenic global warming when the evidence demonstrates the IPCC were, in fact, so cautious. In fact, there is evidence however to suggest that the exact opposite is actually the case, both in terms of the scientific evidence itself (see below) and the way the work of the IPCC is reported. A recent study (Freudenburg 2010) investigated what it calls 'the Asymmetry of Scientific Challenge', the phenomenon in which reports on science fail to evaluate all outcomes, favoring certain probabilities while ignoring others. They found that "...new scientific findings were more than twenty times as likely to support the ASC perspective [that disruption through AGW may be far worse than the IPCC has suggested] than the usual framing of the issue in the U.S. mass media".
"Claims that the IPCC is alarmist are not supported by evidence, and there are clear indications that the opposite may be the case."
Any time that ridicule replaces debate on an issue, you can pretty much count on there being something to hide... for years Liberals have berated anyone that dared disagree with their Global Warming dogma... but prediction after prediction has failed... emails proving data cherry picking and model manipulation have been made public... and many reputable scientists not on the govt dole have disagreed with them... the GW movement has just been a smokescreen for progressives to take over the energy sector and redistribute wealth from there ($1 Trillion Cap and Tax) to buy more votes.... but the GW disciples are still in denial.... I acually admire their desire to keep the environment clean... but they do need to do their own thinking...
http://climatedepot.com/a/9035/SPECIAL-REPORT-More-Than-1000-International-Scientists-Dissent-Over-ManMade-Global-Warming-Claims--Challenge-UN-IPCC--Gore
How much to you make? Is it $/post, or by the word?
"NewStart" it is neither. She is not making a dime displaying her continuing ignorance. Skeptical Science and other sites have easily debunked the original report which was also in that extremely accurate and never wrong (sarcasm intended) Worldnet Daily.
A little info on Obama's appointments
Obama names anti-coal, global warming advocate to head EPA
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/03/obama_names_anti-coal_global_warming_advocate_to_head_epa.html
It's about time.
You mean that the Fox is not guarding the Hen-House?
Cheney must be throwing a fit!
Give I'm hell Anna.
"Justis". "Anna" doesn't have either the research, or critical thinking skills to give anybody "hell". Or at least anybody who is intelligent enough to THOROUGHLY read and research the global warming debate from MULTIPLE sources.
Republicans come in 3 categories:
Dumb, Bought, or Conned
I'm free, Your owned and paid for. Not to mention very stupid.
"Aunt Anna" let's go at it. Here is one of the sources you use. Climate Depot.com. And here is the background for that site.
Marc Morano
Marc Morano runs the climate denial website ClimateDepot.com. He previously worked for Rush Limbaugh and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) -- both vocal climate change deniers.
Although he has no scientific background, Morano has declared that the science of manmade climate change is "collapsing." He has called global warming a "con job" and said that climate scientists "deserve to be publicly flogged." Morano often appears on Fox News to spread misinformation on climate change, and Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly used his material to attack climate scientists.
Climate Depot is sponsored by the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), a conservative think tank that has received funding from ExxonMobil and Chevron. CFACT dismisses the scientific consensus on climate change and maintains that "real world evidence" shows that "global warming claims are failing." To spread its message, CFACT organized the Copenhagen Climate Challenge -- a conference of climate contrarians -- to coincide with the UN climate conference in 2009.
UPDATE (12/5/12): CFACT's 2011 financial disclosure form reveals that it received over $300,000 from Donor's Trust, an anonymously funded group that PBS called the "number one supporter of the groups" that deny climate change. It lists Morano as the highest paid member of its staff at a salary of over $150,000 a year.
Now let's take a look at the main website that I use for debunking idiots who keep claming global warming is not happening and is not being caused by man which is Skeptical Science: Getting Skeptical about global warming skepticism". Here are just some of the contributors:
John Cook
John is the Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland. He originally studied physics at the University of Queensland. After graduating, he majored in solar physics in his post-grad honours year. In 2011, he co-authored the book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand with Haydn Washington
"Aunt Anna" I list the main editor only simply to save space. But there is ZERO doubt that the Skeptical Science site logically, consistently and without fail debunks every argument that manmade global warming deniers like yourself come up with.
Hmmmm....maybe those aren't facts after all? Sorry Anna, nice try.
Democrats come in two flavors:
Dimwitted, deadbeat parasites that want something for nothing... sleazy, slimey, liars that give it to them using my money....