What Biden and the United States have in Common with Other World Leaders on Climate Change: A Brief Report from the Clinton White House and the 2020 UN Framework
It’s something that Biden has mentioned in speeches to other world leaders, like during the UN General Assembly in September.
The Democrats in congress passed a budget that allocated $1 billion dollars to international climate aid, $377 million more than the same budget items during the Trump administration, but less than the White House had requested.
But it remains unclear whether the president will be able to meet his goal — particularly if Republicans make gains in midterm elections this week — because Congress has been reluctant to spend as much money as Biden has asked for.
The United States is the world’s largest economy and largest cumulative emitter of greenhouse gas pollution. It has done more over time to warm the planet than any other nation, although China now emits more on a per-year basis.
Every two years the United States is obliged to submit a report to the UN regarding progress on its climate goals. The reports were not filed by the Trump administration.
In 2020, the most recent year for which complete data is available, developed nations mobilized roughly $83 billion toward climate finance, a mixture of both government grants and loans as well as private dollars.
The U.S. invests a lot of money in terms of total dollars, but has a relatively small amount relative to its economy.
Does It Go to Be Hard to Meet This 11-Billion Climate Change Proposal? The Case of the White House 2023 Budget Request
But as a UN report laid out earlier this month, the pledge still is many times lower than the full amount needed to tackle the immense, global challenges posed by the climate crisis.
The administration hopes to take funds from two different sources: appropriated funding from Congress and federal development agencies.
The White House asked Congress for $5.3 billion in funding in its 2023 budget request in March, which would be enough, in combination with anticipated development finance money, to meet the president’s pledge. It is a big jump from what Congress has done in the past.
The second half could come from sources such as the Export-Import Bank and the International Development Finance Corporation, which use financial instruments to advance U.S. policy goals abroad.
The first — and most immediate — hurdle that Biden faces is Congress. Passing any funding bill requires 60 votes to clear the Senate. Democrats need to win over some Republican lawmakers to join them.
Wyoming Senator John Barrasso, the top Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, denounced the White House’s proposal as “another pipe dream of liberal activism and climate extremism.”
Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/08/1132980254/its-going-to-be-hard-for-biden-to-meet-this-11-billion-climate-change-promise
Senate Budget 2014-2019 Addresses U.S. Policy Concerns with The War on Crime and Spatial Inflation: An Analysis by Leahy
And since the budget was released in the spring, the headwinds facing the administration have only gotten stronger. Inflation has remained stubbornly high, and some economists worry that interest rate hikes from the Federal Reserve could lead to a recession.
Biden has a pledge to raise money from government development agencies. The government invests in projects abroad through agencies like the Export-Import Bank and the International Development Finance Corporation, which lend out money and look to generate a return on their investments.
The money that Congress gives to the DFC is not used to support their work.
The Climate Policy Initiative believes that the agencies could increase their spending to help meet the president’s pledge.
But Tonkonogy warned that it isn’t just about whether the government can find the money. The question is, can these agencies quickly identify and vet quality projects?
To work differently it will require developing comprehensive climate strategies, building up staff capacity, and partnering with other agencies.
According to Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democratic chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the spending package contains emergency assistance for the fight against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It would be the biggest American infusion of assistance yet to Ukraine, above even President Joe Biden’s $37 billion emergency request, and ensure that funding flows to the war effort for months to come.
The bill, which runs for 4,161 pages, has about $858 billion in defence funding and $775 billion in non-defense discretionary programs.
Lawmakers have been late finishing the package for three months. It was supposed to be done by the beginning of the fiscal year.
Senate Speaker Mike Leahy’s “Congress spending omnibus shutdown bill” condemns the Biden-Biden “decision”
The Senate majority leader says that if our friends in Ukraine want to triumph over Russia, America must stand firmly on their side.
The legislation also includes historic revisions to federal election law that aim to prevent any future presidents or presidential candidates from trying to overturn an election. The Electoral Count Act was altered because of former President Donald Trump’s effort to convince Republican politicians to object to the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has warned that if the fiscal year 2023 spending measure fails to gain bipartisan support this week, he would seek another short-term patch into next year, guaranteeing that the new Republican majority in the House would get to shape the package.
Leahy argued against that approach in releasing the bill saying, “the choice is clear. We either have to do our jobs or abandon our responsibilities and not make a difference.
McConnell stated that the GOP’s negotiations were successful. He framed the longer-term spending bill as a victory for the GOP, even as many will undoubtedly vote against it. He said Republicans were successful in increasing defense spending far beyond Biden’s request while scaling back some of the increase Biden wanted for domestic spending.
The director of the Office of Management and Budget said in a statement that neither side had everything they wanted in the deal. But she praised the measure as “good for our economy, our competitiveness, and our country, and I urge Congress to send it to the President’s desk without delay.”
Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/12/20/1144365502/congress-spending-omnibus-shutdown-bill
The Pelosi-Schumer spending bill and the climate of the Arctic: A critical look into a critical problem with the FBI and the Interior Department
The spending on non-defense programs will increase by about 6%. That number includes a 22% increase for VA medical care to help pay for an expansion of health care services and benefits to veterans exposed to toxic burn pits during their service. Some environmental advocacy groups expressed frustration with the funding increases for agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Park Service, which they said don’t keep up with inflation.
The bill’s unveiling was delayed by haggling over language related to location of the FBI’s future headquarters. Maryland lawmakers have argued for more consideration of Black communities in the investment selection process. One of two sites in Maryland’s Prince George’s County, a majority black county, is where they are pushing to build the headquarters. Virginia is competing for the headquarters.
A Senate Democratic aide familiar with the negotiations said Schumer worked to incorporate language in the spending bill ensuring the General Service Administration conduct “separate and detailed consultations” with lawmakers representing the Maryland and Virginia sites to get their perspectives.
In 1996, the Senate finished its work on the last day of the budget year and Congress did not act until the following day. Then-President Bill Clinton signed it that same day.
The Senate is expected to pass the spending bill before the House, with the help of at least 10 Republican senators. Recent catchall spending bills have had lawmakers worried about passing legislation with large amounts of pages on short notice.
“We still haven’t seen a single page of the Pelosi-Schumer spending bill, and they’re expecting us to pass it by the end of this week,” tweeted Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla. It’s crazy.
McConnell shared many of his colleagues’ discontent with the process. He said failure to pass the bill would cause confusion in the military since China poured money into new research and weapons.
When talking about America’s response to the warming of the Arctic, everything comes into play from the White House, Congress and experts. All of that must also be tailored to the conditions of the Arctic, including the complicating issue of building on thawing permafrost — the land is sinking as it warms.
“We’re seeing something that is so dramatic right now.” Students at Duke University were told a year ago by Sfraga. The Arctic is four times warmer than the global average.
While indigenous communities have long thrived in communion with the land there, nation states haven’t had much presence in the northern latitudes because it hasn’t been ripe for exploitation. Shipping and oil were all under lock and key until the sea ice began to abate.
But with dwindling sea ice, tapping the region’s resources is becoming more feasible. Huge military spending is being eyed in conjunction with the economic opportunities.
Russia has already ramped up its military presence and the United States is playing catch-up. Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s team told NPR in a statement that dealing with national security threats from Russia and China in the region will be a top challenge.
Military spending on a changing climate has the potential to outpace mitigation spending from the U.S. government in bills like Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, and the U.N.’s spending on programs like the Green Climate Fund, its largest climate adaptation and mitigation purse.
There has been a new ocean opened in our lifetime due to climate change. In a conversation withNPR, the secretary general of the International Military Council on Climate and Security said they now have a good map of the northern latitudes.
It is thought that Russia has a plan for a toll road for transit on the northern sea route to move goods and energy from Asia to Europe. “And as part of that, he has militarized and nuclearized the Arctic to ensure that ships requiring access would have to rely on Russia’s icebreaking escort. And we’ve seen more aggressive military behavior by Russia.”
It’s not clear how the threat of wildlife deterioration, food scarcity and storm severity are taken into account for grand money-making ventures in the northern latitude.
Climate change is “driving mission for the Department of Defense,” Joe Bryan, special climate adviser to the DOD, told the Brookings Institution last year. On the supply side, it is impacting our ability to actually meet that demand.
They have an abundance of airfields, missile systems, dozens of icebreakers — some of which are nuclear powered — and they conduct military exercises in the region.
The U.S. is investing in filling that arms gap, from the fact that there are bipartisan congressional prerogatives to the White House’s commitment to “increasing the capabilities required to defend our interests” as outlined in the October 2020 National Strategy for the Arctic Region.
Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Fla., chair of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness, told NPR the armed services face an extreme operational challenge that needs to be met with training and resources, including a base on the northern coast of Alaska. One major gap in preparedness is the lack of Navy and Coast Guard vessels able to traverse the ice.
He said he believed we were at two operational icebreakers. “We are kind of outgunned in both presence and capability by the Russians.”
“We’re way, way behind. … We may have to take from other countries icebreakers and use them for the Coast Guard and military. And that’ll come into [the next] NDAA.”
According to a DOD spending bill, a report needs to be written about the feasibility of Navy Destroyers with icebreaking capability for the world’s most frigid regions, and at least three destroyers were authorized in the previous Congress.
Despite Republican control of the House, Garamendi says he doesn’t expect to see DOD funding wane in the Arctic just because it’s tied to climate change.
He believes the House armed services committee will push forward. They’re on everyone’s mind now. It is an accepted problem and I believe that we’ll stay on track.”