Major environmental group makes first ever endorsement of Hillary Clinton
Source: washington post
Major environmental group makes first ever endorsement of Hillary Clinton
By Abby Phillip May 31 at 6:30 AM
Democratic presidential candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton walks in the Memorial Day parade May 30, 2016 in Chappaqua, New York. (Eric Thayer/Getty Images)
A major environmental group, the NRDC Action Fund, will endorse Hillary Clinton on Tuesday in its first-ever political endorsement in a presidential election.
In a statement, the NRDC Action Fund, a political affiliate of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that the unprecedented endorsement is reflective of the need for left-leaning groups to unite against Donald Trump, the likely Republican nominee.
Hillary Clinton is an environmental champion with the passion, experience and savvy to build on President Obamas environmental legacy, Rhea Suh, president of the NRDC Action Fund, said in a statement. More than any other candidate running, Hillary Clinton understands the environmental challenges America faces, and her approach to solving them is grounded in the possibility and promise our democracy affords us.
Suh specifically cited Trump's recent energy speech in North Dakota as one of the main rationales for the announcement....................
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/05/31/major-environmental-group-makes-first-ever-endorsement-of-hillary-clinton/
CONGRATULATIONS TO HILLARY AND HER TEAM.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)quickesst
(6,280 posts)Nice!!!
livetohike
(22,147 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,196 posts)NRDC, longtime member here
Trump will be after National parks and Federal Lands for drilling, mining, developing
of golf courses, hotels, casinos --- all labeled "T"
He's a real estate developer
Yes, Hillary is mainstream, supported oil and fracking as Sec'y of State: what was she
going to do, stop the need for energy and economic growth? Not exactly a way of engaging
the world.
So I'm glad to see someone is thinking of the big, long term picture
Buttonhole those reluctant Democrats and Independents and Millennials
Bernie and Hillary must unite on the environment
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Everything is relative.
Anyway, next to that republican egomaniac, anybody would look good.
spanzini
(17 posts)How do they say it with a straight face? Gulf coast disaster anyone?
We write it and say it, therefore it's true! Three cheers for team Hillary!!!!
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)"The Obama administration's offshore regulators ruled Friday that fracking has no significant environmental effect off the California coastline."
Considering the Ventura fault line and Santa Barbara is already a major earthquake risk what could go wrong?
Response to riversedge (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)I'm very disappointed in the low level of "journalism" and "reporting" of this article. The reporter cough-stenographer-cough basically repeats the release from the NRDC statement without any follow up questioning of the organization or it's spokesperson as to Clinton's international promotion of fracking in Europe, Africa and the Middle East while she was Secretary of State, her support for the Keystone Pipeline, Clinton's very private, very lucrative, no-press-allowed Philadelphia fundraiser for Big Energy lobbyists, criticism of Clinton by other major environmental groups, Hillary's BFF relationship with Monsanto, etc.
Don't tell me that the Washington Post is held in such low regard by the NRDC that it's president or PR person would not take a phone call from a Wa-Po reporter with follow up questions.
The reporter repeats paragraph after paragraph of the pro-Hillary press release, but didn't take time to get a response from Sanders or his campaign. And the NRDC's silence on Sanders is deafening. I suggest that the reporter put down the cheerleader pom-poms & try her hand at investigative reporting. She's never going to be getting an SDX award at the National Press Club with puff pieces like this. I am not surprised that her degree is in government, not in journalism. I suggest she take a career break and enroll in Columbia's graduate program for a master's in journalism.
Check out comments following the article. Here's a sampling:
8:55 AM EST
So what you're saying is, the NRDC Action Fund is thumbs up for Fracking and the Keystone XL Pipeline? Oh, lets not forget about the TPP which will give corporations an opening to pollute more, since they'll be suing every government under the sun to do so, since they'll be sovereign entities now. Good job on your research NRDC Action Fund ... you really knocked this one out of the park, or padded your pockets, either way you've sold your morals and screwed the people of this planet.
Meanwhile the rest of the legit environmental groups found Hillary's supports Fracking which is Hillary approved, According to Greenpeace : Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Super PAC supporting her have received $138,400 from fossil fuel lobbyists and $1,327,210 from bundlers. http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/0...
The NRCD Action Fund endorsing Hillary an Arch supporter of fracking? I thought I'd seen it all. Look, if Clinton has you in her pocket just say so and stop already the Trump bogeyman. Hillary might edge out Sanders in California but she's toast. She's been unelectable as POTUS before and since 2008. She WILL lose to Trump come November. The writing has been on the wall for a long while and only members of her cult are convinced she's presidential material.
TwilightZone
(25,472 posts)Because they endorsed Clinton. This isn't complicated.
"Check out comments following the article"
Yes, because comments are always fact-based and accurate. Just like on DU.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)just an addition to her Wins proving HRC's superiority over Bern.
She won most votes
She won the most delegates
She won the most endorsements
She is the Best Candidate
and will be a Great President!
Lean
(39 posts)is "the Best Candidate" if she has a 55-57% disapproval rating? How does one square that peg?
"Superiority?" Now that is funny stuff! It's not like corruption will follow her into the WH.
She won the most votes in closed primaries.
Super-delegates are not Democratic.
Endorsements mean so much to the voting populace.
You just gotta love the Red Arrow pointing the the Right in her logo. Speaks volumes.
puffy socks
(1,473 posts)especially after Bernie's wins defied all the polls and the Bernie camp bragged on and on about their lack of accuracy and how that meant he would sweep the rest of the states.
Oh and picking apart a logo, yeah that really shows....absolutely nothing. Sounds a lot like "Obama rhymes with Osama." from '08
ProudProgressiveNow
(6,129 posts)EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)Google who's on the board. They're all Hillary campaign donors.
The chair also is buddy buddy with the Podestas.
And we're surprised they've endorsed her?
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)Fuck these people.
trudyco
(1,258 posts)Rhea Suh was at the dept of Interior prior to just becoming newish head o this organization.
Before that she worked at or with Hewlitt and Packard foundations. Promoting anti-fracking. So how can she endorse Hillary over Bernie? Very strange.
RandySF
(58,935 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)supporting her, not the membership?
alarimer
(16,245 posts)Legally, that is. So this is a misleading article. Just like unions, NGO's like this environmental group must keeps its political activity separate, so they set up PACs to run ads and so forth, endorsing this or that candidate.
riversedge
(70,245 posts)Trump, who says the Climate change is a Hoax.
Jerry Brown Verified account
?@JerryBrownGov
An Open Letter to California Democrats and Independents http://www.jerrybrown.org/an_open_letter_to_california_democrats_and_independents
An Open Letter to California Democrats and Independents
Posted by Jerry Brown 26pc on May 31, 2016
On Tuesday, June 7, I have decided to cast my vote for Hillary Clinton because I believe this is the only path forward to win the presidency and stop the dangerous candidacy of Donald Trump.
I have closely watched the primaries and am deeply impressed with how well Bernie Sanders has done. He has driven home the message that the top one percent has unfairly captured way too much of Americas wealth, leaving the majority of people far behind. In 1992, I attempted a similar campaign.
For her part, Hillary Clinton has convincingly made the case that she knows how to get things done and has the tenacity and skill to advance the Democratic agenda. Voters have responded by giving her approximately 3 million more votes and hundreds more delegates than Sanders. If Clinton were to win only 10 percent of the remaining delegates wildly improbable she would still exceed the number needed for the nomination. In other words, Clintons lead is insurmountable and Democrats have shown by millions of votes that they want her as their nominee.
But there is more at stake than mere numbers. The Republican nominee, Donald Trump, has called climate change a hoax and said he will tear up the Paris Climate Agreement. He has promised to deport millions of immigrants and ominously suggested that other countries may need the nuclear bomb. He has also pledged to pack the Supreme Court with only those who please the extreme right.
The stakes couldnt be higher. Our country faces an existential threat from climate change and the spread of nuclear weapons. A new cold war is on the horizon. This is no time for Democrats to keep fighting each other. The general election has already begun. Hillary Clinton, with her long experience, especially as Secretary of State, has a firm grasp of the issues and will be prepared to lead our country on day one.
Next January, I want to be sure that it is Hillary Clinton who takes the oath of office, not Donald Trump.
With respect,
Jerry Brown
Actor
(626 posts)It is curious he says Hillary is the best chance to beat the sociopath.
I dont know if that is correct or not, I dont know how people will react to Bernie being called all kinds of names that mean nothing to adults but mean tons to the idiots.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Like the PP endorsement of Clinton, this too will have repercussions.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)NOT the NRDC
same trick with the Congressional Black Caucus and Planned Parenthood
TwilightZone
(25,472 posts)"NRDC is also the parent organization of the NRDC Action Fund"
https://www.nrdc.org/about
dragonfly301
(399 posts)This endorsement sucks.
PufPuf23
(8,793 posts)Last edited Tue May 31, 2016, 11:57 AM - Edit history (1)
Why? Fracking, big oil, Keystone, supporter of MIC, supporter of carbon offset credits, supporter of free trade deals
POTUS Obama has been weak on the environment regards to priority of the issue.
Stopping war is a most forward environmental initiative as there is nothing more damaging to the environment and wasteful of natural resources than war.
The major environmental groups that rose to prominence in the 1960s and 1970s have become corporatized and weak sauce but good careers for a few since peaking in effectiveness in the 1980s, this includes the Natural Resource Defense Council and its affiliate NRDC Action Fund. NRDC can no longer be described as a grass roots organization. NRDC focuses on politics and fund raising and is part of the status quo. I am not claiming that NRDC is a "bad" organization but that it is a mature organization subject to corporate capture and is not the same grass roots organization as when came to prominence. NRDC maintains access to politicians and corporations now by a willingness to be part of the system and stay within that box.
The wiki for NRDC mentions five court cases; three were progressive environmental initiatives in the 1970s and 1980s, the last two are from the 113th Congress and one could argue the nuance is more to protect specific corporate from grass roots interests.
Legislation[edit]
From wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Resources_Defense_Council
NRDC opposed the Water Rights Protection Act (H.R. 3189; 113th Congress), a bill that would prevent federal agencies from requiring certain entities to relinquish their water rights to the United States in order to use public lands.[18][19] According to opponents, the bill is too broad.[19][20] They believe the bill "could also block federal fisheries agencies like the United States Fish and Wildlife Service from requiring flows that help salmon find fish ladders and safely pass over dams."[19]
Proponents of the bill disagree with NRDC's stance on the bill, arguing that the current Federal policy defended by NRDC seeks to make users of public lands turn over water rights which in many cases they have paid state or local governments for. Operators of ski areas, ranchers, and farmers, and other users of public land say that the Federal policy defended by NRDC denies them rights to use water for which they have already paid, effectively denying them use of the land. The Water Rights Protection Act is supported by national ski area groups, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Association of Conservation Districts, the National Cattlemens Beef Association, the Family Farm Alliance, the National Water Resources Association, the Colorado River Conservation District, the Colorado Association of Conservation Districts, and other interests threatened by existing Federal water policy in the West which the NRDC is defending.[21]
NRDC supported the EPS Service Parts Act of 2014 (H.R. 5057; 113th Congress), a bill that would exempt certain external power supplies from complying with standards set forth in a final rule published by the United States Department of Energy in February 2014.[22][23] The United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce describes the bill as a bill that "provides regulatory relief by making a simple technical correction to the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act to exempt certain power supply (EPS) service and spare parts from federal efficiency standards."[24]
Effect on administrative law
The NRDC has been involved in the following Supreme Court cases interpreting United States administrative law.
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 435 U.S. 519 (1978), which held that courts could not impose additional procedural requirements on administrative agencies beyond that required by the agency's organic statute or the Administrative Procedure Act.
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), which gave administrative agencies broad discretion to interpret statute to make policy changes if Congressional intent was unclear. Chevron is now the most-cited case in American case law, even more so than all the citations to famous decisions such as Marbury v. Madison, Brown v. Board of Education, and Roe v. Wade combined.[25]
Baltimore Gas & Elec. Co. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 462 U.S. 78 (1983)[26] is a United States Supreme Court decision which held to be valid a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rule that the permanent storage of nuclear waste should be assumed to have no environmental impact during the licensing of nuclear power plants.
Regards the NRDC Action Fund:
http://www.nrdcactionfund.org/about/ and,
http://www.nrdcactionfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Action-Fund-FY14-PD-990.pdf
One should note that about 85% of NRDC Action Fund contributions go to pay W-2 salaries of between $175,000 and $422,000 and these same individuals each had between $35,000 to $63,000 of income from actions related to the NRDC but not NRDC Action Fund W-2 income.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)How does this make any sense?
dorkzilla
(5,141 posts)We're meant to ignore all her pro-fracking, pro-Keystone, pro-TPP bullshit and cheer. SO CHEER, DAMMIT!!!!
retrowire
(10,345 posts)Why are there so many people here looking at this and seeing it as perfectly fine???
jpmonk91
(290 posts)The environment is kinda my big issue. Yes it is true trump would be a disaster but that does not excuse an environmental group to support a pro fracking candidate. If they are truly concerned about climate change than they should not support Hillary. We have an obligation to get rid of fossil fuels. Also wierd article. It read more like an excuse than an actual reason.
BlueMTexpat
(15,370 posts)UTB with all the rest of us "corporate shills" - I SO want this primary over.
The really sad thing is that I actually used to like and respect Sanders.
Nevermore. Ever.
DesertRat
(27,995 posts)Herman4747
(1,825 posts)jpmonk91
(290 posts)Is a major loss for Mother Earth. Wow. We can't afford to keep killing our planet. We need to stop burning fossil fuels.
riversedge
(70,245 posts)jpmonk91
(290 posts)Do you? How sad. This is how the human race becomes extinct.
riversedge
(70,245 posts)jpmonk91
(290 posts)What I am trying to say. I am sad for Mother Earth. Trump and HRC are just going to let the raping of our planet continue. Shame on this environmental group for not doing it's job
deathrind
(1,786 posts)You have to wonder what type of "environmental" group backs a candidate that is pro Fracking/Off shore + Arctic drilling.
Hmmm.
This is not a game to me. Our planet is at stake and so is our species
angrychair
(8,702 posts)That "environmental groups" are now pro-coal and pro-fracking and pro-TPP like the candidate they have chosen.
Would she be better for the environment than tRump? In some ways. Having s pro-coal, pro-fracking, pro-TPP agenda, is not in support of the environment.
jpmonk91
(290 posts)This is a dark day for our planet
alarimer
(16,245 posts)And see above, it is not the NRDC itself, but its PAC. Not the same thing at all.
So many of these environmental groups are hopelessly compromised in any case; I don't really trust them at all anymore.
mishi48.59
(15 posts)How are they a "major environmental group"??? . . . .cause I've never heard of them. Just saying.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)It's pretty much self evident.
TwilightZone
(25,472 posts)If you're going to be snarky, perhaps it might be best to have some idea what you're talking about first so you don't look silly.
https://www.nrdc.org/about
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=4207#.V02pWOSYHBh
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)If they are so well damn known, why didn't the editor/publicist just run their name, like they would have with the Sierra Club?
like someone calling a computer online with the note Made by Major Computer maker. Never says who (although usually it's HP and HP is crap) NRDC usually not. That might hurt them in the long run. Like Komen being funded by the oil companies. Komen is in the red.
jpmonk91
(290 posts)They are not a great group if they want either HRC or trump. Our planet is dying and HRC is not a candidate of action. How sad
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I like to minimize people and organizations predicated wholly on my ignorance of them too. Rational though has no place in our biases.
TomCADem
(17,390 posts)They are one of the key environmental groups litigating efforts to prevent overuse of Sacramento Delta water in California to protect species such as the Delta Smelt. When Donald Trump was making light of efforts to save a little fish, he was referring to the NRDC's litigation.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/delta/article73459082.html
Three environmentalist groups filed a lawsuit Friday alleging that to increase water flowing to farms and cities, state and federal regulators in the drought have repeatedly relaxed water-quality standards on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to the detriment of its wild fish species.
The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco claims the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency failed to enforce the Clean Water Act.
The Natural Resources Defense Council, The Bay Institute and Defenders of Wildlife say they sued in response to nearly two dozen decisions made by Californias State Water Resources Control Board that reduced water quality standards to increase water shipments to farms and cities.
The groups say the decisions have had disastrous consequences for native fish that were already struggling in the fragile estuary. Two species in particular, Delta smelt and winter-run Chinook salmon, are hovering on the edge of extinction.
mishi48.59
(15 posts)Now I know.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)endorsement, it makes me curious if there's some sort of financial connection between the NRDC Action Fund and the Clinton Global Initiative.
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)or memory loss from the 1990's oh well. doubt I'll cancel them. Nobody's perfect
Response to riversedge (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to riversedge (Original post)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.