Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't have time to wade through all responses; so will just come out with it, His Orangeness pulled USA out of the Paris Climate Accord to once again prove he is behind Big Coal.
If you read statements made by His Orangeness and or those in the administration as to why the thing happened you keep hearing about "American Jobs" in particular coal. IIRC DT mentioned Pittsburg as being important not Paris.
Whether this particular species of treaty required Senate confirmation is debatable.
There is nothing debatable about it, any agreement made by the administration is subject to the current administration.
Quote:
What is not debatable is that the USA adopted it
It was adopted by the Obama administration..... For this to be adopted by the USA would require a 2/3's vote in the Senate.
Look at it this way, if you enter into a contract with someone that does have the legal authority to sign it then it's certainly not the fault of the guy that cancels it. The fault lies with the person who misrepresented their power and you for not doing your due diligence or willingly ignoring those facts.
My sources say, that the loony limp wristed liberal snowflakes, are making the Birthers look like Saints.
Constant meltdown, is prying on their mental state even further.
Insane asylums are in the works to maintain, societies sanity to place these mental nuts, on the left side of the political spectrum.
There is nothing debatable about it, any agreement made by the administration is subject to the current administration.
It was adopted by the Obama administration..... For this to be adopted by the USA would require a 2/3's vote in the Senate.
Look at it this way, if you enter into a contract with someone that does have the legal authority to sign it then it's certainly not the fault of the guy that cancels it. The fault lies with the person who misrepresented their power and you for not doing your due diligence or willingly ignoring those facts.
Was the USA implementing the agreement before Trump was elected, yes or no?
As far as Trump keeping his word on treaties I would remind you of Trump's questioning our NATO treaty and obligations.
Trump has administrative powers over this treaty which would include making sure other countries are meeting their obligations which are they are not. Unlike the Paris accord this not something he could unilaterally pull out of, this would require Congressional action.
Was the USA implementing the agreement before Trump was elected, yes or no?
Different administrations implement different things that are within their power all the time, none of it is permanent without Congressional action. If an administration wants permanency in the policies they are implementing they need to go through Congress.
While on the topic in 2007 the EPA won a court case that allowed them to implement greenhouse gas policies under the Clean Air Act amendment of 1990. That is what gave Obama the ability to enter into this agreement to begin with. On the back burner for the last decade is an amendment that would strip the EPA of this power. If that bill is passed no future President will be able to enter such agreements without further amendments to the law.
Not only that the Paris Accord is nothing more than global socialism. I keep hearing people praise China while they bash Trump for this. The TRUTH is China has announced, or begun developing, several new coal projects throughout the world. The projects’ total capacity — more than 52 gigawatts — is more than that of planned coal-plant closures in the U.S. by 2020. So how exactly is that helping curb this eminent threat of climate change? Answer is its not.
If these big business REALLY want to stop Climate Change maybe they can start by giving up their private jets? This stuff is all lip service.
There is nothing debatable about it, any agreement made by the administration is subject to the current administration.
It was adopted by the Obama administration..... For this to be adopted by the USA would require a 2/3's vote in the Senate.
Look at it this way, if you enter into a contract with someone that does have the legal authority to sign it then it's certainly not the fault of the guy that cancels it. The fault lies with the person who misrepresented their power and you for not doing your due diligence or willingly ignoring those facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
Trump has administrative powers over this treaty which would include making sure other countries are meeting their obligations which are they are not. Unlike the Paris accord this not something he could unilaterally pull out of, this would require Congressional action.
Trump had other remedies other than pulling out of the Accords. The USA was implementing the Accords, and, whether you acknowledge this or not, US prestige was on the line. A more politically savvy President would have handled this far differently.
Different administrations implement different things that are within their power all the time, none of it is permanent without Congressional action. If an administration wants permanency in the policies they are implementing they need to go through Congress.
While on the topic in 2007 the EPA won a court case that allowed them to implement greenhouse gas policies under the Clean Air Act amendment of 1990. That is what gave Obama the ability to enter into this agreement to begin with. On the back burner for the last decade is an amendment that would strip the EPA of this power. If that bill is passed no future President will be able to enter such agreements without further amendments to the law.
I agree with you in part, I do not like the expansion of executive orders. All things being equal, yes Senate confirmation is required of all treaties. There are more than a few treaties, however, that the USA has never ratified, but are nonetheless being honored.
There are different levels of international agreements, treaties, accords, understandings, etc. some of which require Senate approval, some that do not.
I suppose, my mistake in our discussion, was referring to the Paris Accords as a treaty, which it may or may not be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
