Mediaboss Marketing

The Biden administrations crackdown on methane leaks from oil wells is based in part on a new powerful policy tool that could strengthen its legal authority to cut greenhouse gas emissions across the entire economy including from cars, power plants, factories and oil refineries.

New limits on methane, announced Saturday by the Environmental Protection Agency during the COP28 climate talks in Dubai, take aim at just one source of climate warming pollution. Methane, which spews from oil and gas drilling sites, is 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide when it comes to heating the atmosphere in the short term.

But within the language of the methane rule, E.P.A. economists have tucked a controversial calculation that would give the government legal authority to aggressively limit climate-warming pollution from nearly every smokestack and tailpipe across the country.

The number, known as the social cost of carbon, has been used since the Obama administration to calculate the harm to the economy caused by one ton of carbon dioxide pollution. The metric is used to weigh the economic benefits and costs of regulations that apply to polluting industries, such as transportation and energy.

As scientists have increasingly been able to link planetary warming to wildfires, floods, droughts, storms and heat waves, estimates of the social cost of carbon have grown more sophisticated.

The higher the number, the greater the governments justification for compelling polluters to reduce the emissions that are dangerously heating the planet. During the Obama administration, White House economists calculated the social cost of carbon at $42 a ton. The Trump administration lowered it to less than $5 a ton. Under President Biden, the cost was returned to Obama levels, adjusted for inflation and set at $51.

The new estimate of the social cost of carbon, making its debut in a legally binding federal regulation, is almost four times that amount: $190 a ton.

E.P.A. officials say they intend to use that figure in all the agencys climate regulations moving forward.

This is an enormous victory this rocks. Its awesome! said Michael Greenstone, the Obama administration economist who first came up with the idea of using the social cost of carbon to create an economic justification for climate policy.

It brings the U.S. government to the frontier of climate science and economics, after we had fallen behind, said Mr. Greenstone, who now directs the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago. And it means that it will be justified to have more stringent climate regulations. That will mean that polluting power plants and cars will not be able to emit as much.

The new number will be put into action right away: the E.P.A. plans this spring to release final regulations to curb carbon dioxide from cars, trucks and power plants. Plug the new number into the agencys proposal to tighten tailpipe emissions by ramping up sales of electric vehicles or into its proposal to eliminate pollution from power plants, and the economic benefits of each rule could increase to more than $1 trillion, much greater than the estimated cost to the affected industries. It would be similar for new rules to cut pollution from steel and cement plants, factories and oil refineries, which Mr. Biden is planning if he wins reelection to a second term.

With such a high number, many more actions to fight climate change will pass the cost-benefit test, said Michael B. Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.

Thats a crucial point in the legal fight over the regulations: historically, when the government can show that the economic benefit of a regulation is greater than its cost, the courts are likely to uphold those rules against legal challenges.

This number means that the government has a weapon that it can use to justify anything it wants to do, Elizabeth Murrill, the Republican solicitor general of Louisiana, said in an interview.

Ms. Murrill is part of a group of Republican state attorneys general that is preparing to fight the climate regulations coming from the Biden administration, which they see as a government assault on industry.

A federal judge had dismissed one challenge to the Biden administrations decision to set the cost of carbon pollution at $51 a ton. Ms. Murrill said the new number should be easier to attack in court because it would carry much greater economic consequences.

Now weve got a concrete application of the numbers and now we can go back and challenge everything again, she said.

E.P.A. officials said they are prepared for any legal challenge. They spent more than two years working on a 182-page analysis, documenting the scientific and economic methods that they used to consider the damages to livelihoods, property values and commodity costs from climate change.

Its a huge deal, and it reflects the impacts of climate change that people are living in their daily experience, said Vicki Arroyo, E.P.A.s associate administrator for policy, in an interview.

If you look at the recent National Climate Assessment these numbers reflect what the scientific community has said is the cost to society of climate change, said Ms. Arroyo, pointing to the release last month of a sweeping report documenting the impact of climate change on American lives, from rising fatalities during extreme heat in the Southwest, earlier and longer pollen seasons in Texas, northward migration of crop pests in the Corn Belt, and more damaging hailstorms in Wyoming and Nebraska.

The assessment includes a chapter on economics, reflecting an expanding field of research into the financial costs of a warming planet and how they impact households, businesses and markets.

Researchers for the National Academies of Science concluded in 2017 that the Obama-era estimate that every ton of carbon pollution results in $42 of damage to the economy was outdated, and recommended that the government revise the figure. A study last year in the journal Nature concluded the price should be $185 per ton.

Mr. Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, could try to shrink the cost of carbon metric if he wins the White House, as he did when he cut the Obama-era number.

But Mandy Gunasekara, who served as chief of staff of the E.P.A. in the Trump administration, said that given the research and analysis underpinning the new number, it could be difficult for a new administration to easily reduce it.

There is a heavy degree of legal security, given the numbers inclusion in the new methane regulation, said Ms. Gunasekara, who is now a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research organization that is writing the blueprint for the next Republican administrations energy and climate agenda.

Still, she said, a future Republican administration is likely to try.

See the original post:
Biden Administration Unleashes Powerful Regulatory Tool Aimed at ... - The New York Times

Yet, three days after that poll hit, Democrats took Republicans behind the woodshed, enshrining the right to make reproductive decisions in the Ohio constitution, taking control of the Virginia legislature, taking a state supreme court seat in Pennsylvania, and reelecting a popular Democrat as governor in the deep-red state of Kentucky.

This all gave me whiplash. Just like in 2011, we have an early poll screaming doom and gloom for a Democratic incumbent. Yes, we are officially in the Democratic bedwetting era for the 2024 presidential election. But heres some advice from someone whos been here before: Dont panic. Heres why.

Silvers 2011 analysis did not age well: A year later, Obama wiped the floor with Mitt Romney. But Silver wasnt alone. In this publication, polling done a year out had Obama tied with Romney in 10 battleground states; we ended up winning 9 of them. In December 2011, a Gallup poll had Obama losing to Romney by 5 percent across 12 battleground states; we won 11. Bill Clinton trailed about this same time in his reelection cycle. A year before a presidential election, it is just too early to get an accurate read on how the people will actually vote. There are a few reasons for this.

The people who take the time to answer pollster questions right now are already politically engaged. They are either die-hard partisans or trying to make a point. But swing voters arent tuned in yet and may not decide who to back until very late, and they are the ones who will decide this election.

You cant predict what hasnt happened yet. Think of all the election-shattering news that happened in the year before. In 2008, the subprime bubble popped, cratering the economy. In Obamas reelection, the economy rebounded and then Hurricane Sandy hit, focusing attention on the presidents empathy and effectiveness in a crisis. In 2016, we all got sick of the phrase, But Her Emails! and in 2020, a global pandemic turned the election on its head. Next year, what will it be? Will Trump go to prison? Its possible. (Can you campaign from behind bars?) I wouldnt even call these October surprises you can almost guarantee that something big and unexpected will happen next year.

Elections are a choice, and we havent formalized that choice yet. Once voters know their options, their opinions change. While I dont see any likely alternative than a rematch between Biden and Trump in 2024, thats not what voters see. There is still a GOP primary going on, and several candidates left for Trump to officially beat.

Instead of fretting about early polls, Democrats should follow real data like voter registration, special elections, and turnout and concentrate on what matters:

Focus on the economic message. Back in 2011, we were in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and unemployment was historically high. But I believed then and I still believe that the economy is what voters care about most, so we focused our energy on building up Obamas economic message. Specifically, we talked about how the president saved the American auto industry and how it created hundreds of thousands of jobs. That work paid off, with approval of Obamas handling of the economy rising from 35 percent in November 2011 to 48 percent right before the election. The Biden campaign has a much better economy than we did in 2011, and its individual policies are very popular; there is still plenty of time to break through with voters the policies they like are actually Bidenomics.

Double down on the battleground states. In 2011, the data told us that working class voters in battleground states would decide the election. The Biden campaign knows that there are just seven battleground states this time, with a few paths to victory. Biden can win if he holds onto the Blue Wall states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin; he can hold onto his gains from 2020 in the Sunbelt; and he can try to expand the map by winning North Carolina. And Biden has smartly already begun this work, with the campaign increasing its $25 million advertising spend in these key states.

Get ready for the GOP opponent that Biden has already defeated once. In 2011, we didnt know who wed face in the general election. We also didnt know how formidable Romney would be. But very likely, this is going to be a choice between Biden or Trump. With Biden, you get a president who has passed historic legislation, running on popular policies with little-to-no drama in the White House. With Trump, you have a candidate charged with 91 felony counts and a different court date every week. Trump means right-wing extremism, everyday chaos, criminal behavior, fundamental freedoms stripped away, and a rejection of democratic norms. While some will argue that Trump is already defined in voters minds, many Americans still arent paying close attention to the election. I believe voters will move in Bidens direction when they hear what the president has done, and get reminded (by Democrats and Biden himself) of the chaotic, lawless circus that was Trumps presidency.

This will be a very close election, and there will be plenty more times Democrats will feel nervous. But what will make a difference is the work itself, engaging voters and spreading a positive message about his accomplishments, economic policies, and views on issues like abortion and freedoms. Biden has been counted out time and time again, and hes proved pollsters and pundits wrong. His campaign (along with the rest of us) needs to ignore the noise and build the strong campaign it needs to win just like in 2020. And Democrats need to remember what I learned back in 2011: Voters decide elections, not polls.

More:
I Was Obama's 2012 Campaign Manager. There's No Need to Panic Over Biden. - POLITICO

1. Bill Maher scolds Obama's 'moral equivalency' on Israel-Hamas: He 'disappointed me'  Fox News
2. Alan Dershowitz calls out Obama's 'deep hatred of Israel': 'He should be ashamed'  Fox Business
3. 'Nobody's hands are clean': Obama urges reflection amid Israel-Hamas conflict  POLITICO

Read this article:
Bill Maher scolds Obama's 'moral equivalency' on Israel-Hamas: He 'disappointed me' - Fox News

Consider the many questions. How do you regulate AI without stifling innovation? How do you ensure global cooperation and standards? How do you protect vulnerable industries and job markets? How do you make sure tight controls at home dont result in geopolitical rivals like China surging ahead? It will take a leader of exceptional talent to even begin to tackle all or any of that. Obama is uniquely qualified and seems invigorated by the challenge.

While Donald Trump is often viewed as the Twitter president, it was Obama who was the first to be elected thanks to the then-emerging medium of social media. With a tech-savvy young campaign staff, Obama was able to secure many small donations from a vast number of people, raising his profile in a way that might have proved more difficult with traditional media outlets alone.

In office, he was an extremely digitally literate president. He appointed the federal governments first chief technology officer and later directed the creation of the US Digital Service a department, inspired by a similar outfit in the UK, that was responsible for revamping many of the governments online services. If youve visited government websites that dont look like relics from the mid-1990s, you can often thank the service. While it had a troubled launch, Healthcare.gov went on to enroll tens of millions of Americans in health care.

These feats were only possible thanks to Obamas concerted effort to get capable technology brains into government jobs and to make public service a more appealing prospect for those who could otherwise pursue better pay in Silicon Valley. The government had been leveled up. We are far better equipped to handle the AI revolution because President Obama laid those foundations, said Jennifer Pahlka, who served as US deputy chief technology officer under Obama, when I spoke to her this week. Obama seems ready to do it again, telling The Verge the country needs hotshot young people who are interested in AI to do a stint outside of the companies themselves and go work for government for a while.

Pahlkas new book, Recoding America, isnt ostensibly about artificial intelligence, but it does highlight the work that needs to be done within government to overcome some of the bureaucracies that might slow down progress as America seeks to adopt and contain AI. Encouragingly, the book appeared recently on Obamas shared reading list in which he detailed some sources he had used to shape my perspective over the past year. Hes trying to say something with that list, Pahlka suggests, noting Obamas careful balance of material highlighting AIs harms but also sources that speak of its potential.

His respect of technology companies and the work they do made Obama a mostly popular figure in Silicon Valley, so much so that when he left the White House, some speculated that he might become a venture capitalist. During his time in office, he held town halls at top companies such as LinkedIn and Meta Platforms Inc. and was the star draw at 2016s South by Southwest Festival in Austin, Texas, one of the premier technology events of the year. When Obama made a historic trip to Cuba, he took with him Brian Chesky, the chief executive officer of Airbnb Inc. (Following a stint at Amazon.com Inc., Jay Carney, Obamas former press secretary, is now Airbnbs head of policy one of several former Obama figures to find roles in tech.) Bidens relationship with big tech is rockier.

But Obama knows where Silicon Valley thinking hits its limits. Government will never run the way Silicon Valley runs because, by definition, democracy is messy, he said in 2016. This is a big, diverse country with a lot of interests and a lot of disparate points of view. And part of governments job, by the way, is dealing with problems that nobody else wants to deal with.

Obamas record on tech is not without its blemishes, however. As president, he oversaw some of the most egregiously harmful use of cutting-edge tech, with drone warfare and the NSAs dragnet of surveillance. And those who think technology companies have become too powerful point to Obama upholding an antitrust status quo that failed to challenge big tech deals, such as Facebooks acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram.

It must also be said that one technology that can be enormously harmful, social media, exploded under his watch. As he benefited from the enormous boost it gave to his campaigning and reputation, he was perhaps less focused on the emerging harms of hate speech and misinformation.

These are subjects he seems to be thinking about deeply now. At a recent event held in Chicago to commemorate the 15th anniversary of his election victory, Obama was in a reflective mood, one of his former staffers told me, discussing his time in office and the current state of the world, then asking: Was there something else I could have done?

Well, if Obama is feeling regret, then he should channel that energy toward dealing with AI, which will come to encompass many issues we know Obama cares deeply about. It will affect fairness in policing, in voting rights, in job creation and workforce diversity. It will transform education and access to it. It is already upending creative industries (the Obamas own a production company) and the legal profession (he used to be a lawyer). He has been deepfaked perhaps more than any other individual.

You wont find a more capable figure who can harness the best of Silicon Valley while understanding how vital it is to keep such advancements under sensible control.

Link:
Obama is the AI czar we need for global cooperation - Deccan Herald

The Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policys will host a discussion with Cody Keenan, former White House director of speech writing when Barack Obama was president of the U.S. This event will take place on Tuesday, Nov. 14, at 7 p.m. in the Bazarsky Lecture Hall in OHare Academic Building. To register, go here.

Cody Keenan will discuss the ten most dramatic days of Obamas presidency when a hate-fueled massacre happened at a Black church in 2015 and looming Supreme Court decisions put the character of the country on the line and how a presidents words can bring a nation together or tear it apart. The discussion will be based on a book hes written entitled Grace: President Obama and Ten Days in the Battle for America.

Keenan wrote with Barack Obama for nearly fourteen years, rising from a campaign intern in Chicago to director of speechwriting at the White House and Obamas post-presidential collaborator. Hes been named the Springsteen of the Obama White House, Obama calls him Hemingway, and British GQ once listed him as one of the 35 Coolest Men under 38 (and a Half).

Keenan got his start in public service as a young aide to the legendary senator Edward M. Kennedy. He holds a masters degree from Harvard Universitys John F. Kennedy School of Government and a B.A. from Northwestern University, where he teaches a course on speechwriting.

A sought-after expert on politics, messaging and current affairs, he is now a partner at leading speechwriting firm Fenway Strategies and teaches a popular course on political speechwriting to undergraduates at Northwestern University.

To register for the event on Tuesday, Nov. 14, at 7 p.m, go here.

Featured image by Shane Collins

View post:
Attend discussion with Cody Keenan, former speech writer for ... - SALVEtoday