What Would Democrats Do for US Policy on Global Warming

[Low Key]

Sometimes I get the feeling that the drafters of the constitution didn't know what greenhouse gasses were.

[daaaaahawkz]

[ QUOTE ]
Short answer:

The economy, personal responsibility, and freedom get ass raped ... no lube

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Really, why does anyone object to research on this matter?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody opposes research on this matter. They oppose government funding of it, and for good reason. It's not authorized by the constitution.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol?

[natedogg]

He has a point in that the constitution enumerates the limits of congressional powers, and most of the spending and regulating that congress does is clearly unconstitutional unless you are results-oriented (which the courts have been for decades).

This is why they needed to pass a constitutional amendment to have an income tax. The courts struck it down for years.

Congress has been given the keys to the kingdom with the expansive readings of the Commerce Clause that developed over the last century.

We need a new constitutional amendment to justify most of what congress is doing. We could call it the "Nanny state amendment".

natedogg

[foal]

assuming we can actually make a difference, should we have the "freedom" to cause massive climate change that affects the whole planet?

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Beyond money for alternative energy research and subsidies, I actually don't know. I imagine there's more depending on the individual politician. I don't think ratifying Kyoto would be a policy priority for Hillary or Obama.

A couple guesses: a carbon tax designed to make burning fossil fuels and a cap & trade system separate from Kyoto for CO2. I don't think a majority of Dems support either proposal.

[/ QUOTE ]

So in reality the Democrats don't have a plan for stopping global warming. No reason to vote for Democrats based on that issue. Put another way, if global warming is key issue for you, if you vote for a Democrat you're only hoping that they come up with a plan. Your vote is based in part at least on faith.

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]
Your vote is based in part at least on faith.

[/ QUOTE ]
Same with any vote.

[Low Key]

Is hope for a plan > no hope for a plan?

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your vote is based in part at least on faith.

[/ QUOTE ]
Same with any vote.

[/ QUOTE ]

Weak reason to vote in truth. If promises are made and not kept then it's easy to cast your vote differently the next time. I think we can do better than the lesser of two evils. Politicians should be held accountable so there should be expectations.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Is hope for a plan > no hope for a plan?

[/ QUOTE ]

(Enriching special interests with mucho higher energy prices for no reason because there is no plan only hope )

<

( than having moderated energy prices with no hope )