Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Lieberman-Warner’

Tonight, I need to thank my good friend and fellow blogger Lynn Miller, from OrganicMania, for including La Marguerite in her recommended list of ‘Top Mommy Blogs‘, to Alltop. Lynn’s effort paid off, and starting now, La Marguerite will be featured on Alltop, along with all the other mommy blogs on Lynn’s list. 

Lynn’s Alltop announcement got me thinking. Moms need to have a bigger role in the climate discourse. We are talking about Mother Earth after all. The qualities that come to us as mothers, as in giving, protecting, nurturing, and sustaining life, are the same ones that are needed to remedy climate change. For we need to take care of our planet, the same way it has sustained us for thousands of years.  Even the climate narrative is imbued with motherly words. Think sustainability, climate protection,  Climate Security Act, Environmental Protection Agency, just to name a few. 

Sure there are the Eco-Moms, and the mommy bloggers, and a few token names in the environmental stratospheres. Frances Beinecke, at the helm of the Natural Resources Defense Council, Laurie David without whom An Inconvenient Truth would not have made it to the Oscars, . . . I can’t think of others right now. 

Looking back on the recent G8 Environment Summit, there were three women and twelve men. During this week’s Senate debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, 16 out of the 100 senators debating were women. When Richard Branson convened his summit, not a single woman, other than accompanying wives, was invited.  

Things are changing though. Although, I did not vote for Hillary, I did appreciate the women’s movement behind her. Women all over America are rising, and deciding that their voices need to be heard. Now I am urging these same women, and the ones behind Obama, and McCain also, to apply the same zeal to protecting the world and its children. For decades, women have gathered for book clubs and Tupperware parties, and Bible study groups. The EcoMoms idea, or something like it, needs to spread.

Read Full Post »

This week’s Senate deliberations on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Bill, made for a fascinating display of high-level politics psychology, all viewable on YouTube:

Yet another display of kindergarten squabble, this time from the Senate Republican Minority – with a few exceptions – How else would you call the ridiculous request of subjecting colleagues to a whole day of reading of a 500 page document?

Per Reuters, ‘Environmental groups were jubilant, even as the bill was defeated . “Today’s vote sets the stage for a new president and Congress to enact strong legislation that will more effectively build a clean energy economy and prevent the worst consequences of global warming,” a coalition of green groups, including Environmental Defense Fund, National Wildlife Federation and Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.

I am not sure I can share such enthusiasm. That is placing a lot of hope in our new president, and in the Congress. It will require new anti-lobbying legislation, to minimize the power of the special fossil fuel interests, over our senators and congressmen. Also, climate change does not respond well to our human attempts at bargaining for more time. Every day counts, at this point.

Again, I ask myself the question of why? Why, would otherwise, well meaning, intelligent people engage in such destructive acts as denying their constituents the chance of a healthy place to live? All I can think of, is that these climate denying senators are the victim of terrible misinformation, on the part of lobbyists, and the Bush administration. They obviously do not understand the realities of climate science and economics. They may also be seduced into cheap populism, the same way Hillary Clinton tried to rally popular support with her gas tax holiday proposal. All in all, not a pretty picture, and one that raises issues of political ethics.

The solution, besides pushing for more Democratic representation in both houses? Maybe introducing climate change on the agendas of both Senate and House Ethics Committees? And asking that the next rounds of climate debates be preceded by introductory sessions on climate ethics.

Read Full Post »