RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

McKibben writes: "'Brazen' might as well be the official motto of the Trump Administration. Even so, it's hard to top the most ecologically unsound President in modern American history giving a speech on Monday touting his environmental record while standing beside David Bernhardt, the former oil lobbyist who is the Interior Secretary, and Andrew Wheeler, the former coal lobbyist who is the administrator of the E.P.A."

Coal workers at Trump rally. (photo: AP)
Coal workers at Trump rally. (photo: AP)

Why Donald Trump Suddenly Decided to Talk About the Environment

By Bill McKibben, The New Yorker

11 July 19


razen” might as well be the official motto of the Trump Administration. Even so, it’s hard to top the most ecologically unsound President in modern American history giving a speech on Monday touting his environmental record while standing in the East Room of the White House beside David Bernhardt, the former oil lobbyist who is the Interior Secretary, and Andrew Wheeler, the former coal lobbyist who is the administrator of the E.P.A.—both of whom have been trying to gut America’s environmental laws. Oh, and on the day when a rainfall described by local authorities as “historic” managed to flood the White House basement.

By now, we are used to Trump’s big-lie technique. Even by that standard, however, the claim that “we are working harder than many previous Administrations, maybe almost all of them,” on environmental protection will be believed by exactly no one for whom words have not yet lost their common-sense meaning. Trying to parse the nonsense of Trump’s speech sentence by sentence is silly, so concentrate instead on its underlying meaning: the oil companies clearly won a crucial battle with Trump’s election, postponing their moment of reckoning. (Less so the coal barons, whose decline was already too far advanced). But they clearly sense that they are losing the war, and more decisively than before. Trump’s big-man folly—withdrawing from the Paris climate accords, for instance, when it would have been easy enough to sabotage progress more quietly—has decisively discomforted the suburban voters that he must retain for reëlection.

By all accounts, it was the President’s pollsters who insisted on this strange talk, because they are desperately afraid that they are losing those independents (particularly women) who have come to fear the physical future that climate change is imposing. What does it mean, after all, to boast that we have the “cleanest air” ever, when wildfire smoke now obscures swaths of sky for large portions of the year? What does it mean to say the water is cleaner than it was in 1970, when water now drops from the sky in such volumes that insurance companies have begun to declare cellars “uninsurable?”

The absurdity of the whole enterprise is clear when you remember that Trump doesn’t even believe that global warming is real—he has stated this repeatedly. In that case, only fear of the polls could possibly drive him to stress that America’s carbon emissions are down (except for, um, last year, when they went, um, up). Why else would he care? So that’s craven as well as brazen. But cravenness is probably a good sign—it means that the school strikers and the divestment campaigners and the pipeline protesters and the marching scientists have carried the debate. The tiny minority of climate deniers currently wield federal political power, but it’s finally beginning to sink in with the broader public that climate change is the threat of our time. Among Democrats, that process is well advanced—by some measures, climate change is the No. 1 voting issue in the primary, and, indeed, they are announcing serious cash-on-the-barrelhead plans to do something about it. But Trump’s performance on Monday must indicate that it’s also increasingly the case among independents, the group that holds the key to his electoral future.

This is good not because it means that Trump will act—he won’t. It’s good because it means that if we move past Trumpism there’s at least a somewhat greater chance that the larger political system will move, too. But, at this point, it’s also hard to believe that political action will be swift enough or comprehensive enough to make a decisive difference. After all, the Obama Administration, which sincerely believed that climate change was real, succeeded only in replacing some coal-fired power generation with natural gas, which in turn succeeded only in replacing heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions with heat-trapping methane emissions. (It’s not clear that total greenhouse-gas emissions budged at all during the Obama years.) If the G.O.P. maintains any political traction at all in the next dispensation, it will be hard to pass legislation like the Green New Deal, which represents precisely the scale of commitment needed to catch up with the out-of-control physics of global warming. If the Trump follies have lowered the bar to the point where a return to Obama-era politics is all that’s politically possible, then significantly slowing the rise of the planet’s temperature by federal action will remain difficult.

So it’s profoundly important that activists keep the pressure on other power centers, too: on state and local governments, and on the financial institutions that keep the fossil-fuel industry afloat. To use an unfortunately apropos metaphor, all that pressure will eventually force a hole in the dam. The political flop sweat that Trump was trying to mop up on Monday is a sure small sign of the coming deluge.

Email This Page your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+29 # susanlno 2019-07-11 10:22
I had to laugh at the description of David Bernhardt and Andrew Wheeler as former fossil fuel industry lobbyists. One thing four decades of corporate rule should have taught us is that there's no such thing as a "former" industry lobbyist.
+9 # elizabethblock 2019-07-11 12:27
Money talks - but votes talk, too. It's harder to raise the volume of the voice of votes, but it can be done.
+10 # DongiC 2019-07-11 16:51
The voters talked in 2018 and gave us some magnificent fighters for a Green Revolution: AOC, Omar, Pressley, Tlaib. + they provided for a Democratic control of the House of Representatives . Now it is time to get control of the Senate and the White House. The electorate wants to survive global warming and realizes there is no hope from the Republicans. So go for broke all you Progressive candidates and lead this country down the path of survival. It is your destiny!
-11 # BKnowswhitt 2019-07-12 11:30
Lobbyists for Climate Scherade is greater now than Fossil Fuel industry .. & Lying? Please see some rebuttal science before you buy into the emotionally based argument by the Dems and Left since they offer nothing of substance .. this is their main campaign topic .. see this site .. oh yeah i know .. you'll all come back with something like .. that is a republican site or that is contrived etc .. when in fact you know nothing but blogs like this one and this guy is a Nutcase ..
-8 # BKnowswhitt 2019-07-12 15:20
And Bill McKibben is a paid Lobbyist for the Left as well .. big money .. EPA under O'Bumma/Pelosi paid them all with government grant to studies that supported Global Warming did not for the opposition .. once again good on Trump getting rid of it all .. they are getting rich .. and yes lobbyists switch sides like Politicians .. Money and Career 'Trumps' the Truth often ..
0 # DongiC 2019-07-16 01:07
BKnowswhitt, speaking of paid lobbyists , you do quite well writing in behalf of your corporate billionaire buddies. Your muddled thinking, however, earns you a multitude of red thumbs or maybe it's your jaundiced views from the right wing. Do you really believe the drivel that you propound? Maybe, you are paid by the number of red thumbs that you receive here. If so, it's a neat part-time job.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.