Governors, mayors address climate change ('cannot wait for feds')

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1134122193289810.xml&coll=2

Leaders say they 'cannot afford to wait' for federal help

Friday, December 09, 2005
Charles J. Hanley
Associated Press

Montreal- Clamping down on automobile emissions and plugging city buildings into wind or solar power, U.S. governors and mayors are stepping in to help head off climate change where they say the federal government is failing.

"Together we can make a huge difference," Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels said Thursday as he and other U.S. city executives worked the corridors of the United Nations climate conference in Montreal.

They said they hoped to spur the Bush administration to take the lead. But although federal action is needed, "we cannot afford to wait for federal action," said K.C. Golden, an environmental consultant to U.S. local governments, including Seattle.

The action is unfolding quickly in places like California, where Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday received a task force's proposals for meet ing his goal of reducing his state's "greenhouse gas" emissions to 1990 levels by 2020...

post is important and can have an impact.

Now if he will just get out of the way....

Mayor Nickels in particular (and his Seattle predecessors) have been VERY influential on these issues. A textbook example of not just talking the talk, but acting locally and doing things that matter.

it actually plays into *²'s hands.. "See, the states & towns can handle this on their own..they don't need big government doin' it fer 'em"..


This crew in DC has an "out" for everything they do or don't do..

And having a large pool of experienced people who know how to organize and implement changes will help in the long-term, no matter how * might try to use this to justify his position. Many of the changes would have to be done at this level anyway (energy markets, infrastructure, changes to planning and zoning), since most of us live in towns and cities.

At the very least, it would reveal that * is profoundly ignorant about the actual wants and needs of local and state agencies, no matter how much he might hold them up as alternatives to "big government".

The US is actually further ahead in terms of local initiatives, in a majority of jurisdictions, compared to us in Canada (even though our feds have claimed to support Kyoto). My landlord works for a provincial government which has been resisting changes, though apparently his boss (who went to the Montreal conference too) was reportedly so impressed by the number of state/provincial governments, and municipalities, who are doing mitigation right now that he actually changed his mind on some key issues! (Gotta love that peer pressure! And having Bill Clinton pep-talking him won't hurt either.)

States impose stricter laws. The corporations get in a snit and and take it to the SCOTUS where their paid for politicians have appointed just the right judges to rule against states rights in favour of Fed on issues of commerce WITHIN the state.
I hope you all have stocked up on Vaseline.

This is a matter for the states.
The talk about federal action is
being used as an excuse for
inaction by the states.

States and cities can 'fine tune' their
response, for local conditions.
One size, does not fit all.

You hvve to start somewhere.

on the issue of starting somewhere,
when does Canada and EU {or their subdivisions}
actually pass laws that reduce carbon emissions?
...
the only reason that the EU is somewhat close
to meeting their Kyoto target is their selfish
choice of 1990 as the baseline year,
{so as to include now-shuttered Soviet era industry}