California took ‘big steps back' in climate actions in 2024, environmental group says
CALIFORNIA TOOK 'BIG STEPS BACK' IN CLIMATE ACTIONS IN 2024, GROUP SAYS
Via Stephen Hobbs...
California lawmakers notched key environmental victories in 2024, but the state's overall standing on climate leadership dropped, according to the advocacy organization California Environmental Voters annual scorecard. The group gave the state an 84% grade, a drop in two percentage points from the year before and from a 91% score in 2022.
During a press conference Wednesday, Mary Creasman, the organization's executive director, celebrated that voters in November passed Proposition 4, which allowed the state to sell a $10 billion bond for natural resources and climate activities. It was placed on the ballot by the Legislature.
But, she added, lawmakers did not end subsidies to the oil and gas industry and cut back on climate-related funding in the state budget.
'We made some big progress moving forward, but we also had some big steps back in terms of undercutting our own progress through anti-environmental actions,' Creasman said.
The organization gave Gov. Gavin Newsom a B-, the same score he earned the year before. One of the knocks on his records, according to the group, was his veto of a bill that would have placed a warning label about air pollution on gas stoves.
Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Salinas, earned As.
PADILLA VOTES NO ON TRUMP'S AG PICK, SHE ADVANCES ANYWAY
The Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday voted 12-10 to advance President Donald Trump's attorney general nominee — former Florida Attorney General Pamela Bondi — but it did so without the vote of Sen. Alex Padilla, D-California.
It was Bondi's waffling on whether the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects birthright citizenship (it does, according to multiple U.S. Supreme Court decisions) that led Padilla to vote no.
In remarks to the committee, Padilla slammed Bondi, a two-term AG with decades of legal experience, saying she was unfamiliar with the citizenship clause.
'She and I discussed the very issue when we met one-on-one, it's clearly been in the news, and when given the opportunity to discuss it during the hearing, here in public, she refused to answer,' Padilla said. 'Even worse, offensively, either claimed that she needed to study or telling me that she was not going to be doing my homework. Colleagues, in that moment, I wasn't asking her to do my homework. I was asking her if she did hers.'
Padilla insisted that the law is clear: the Fourteenth Amendment does protect birthright citizenship, despite Trump's attempts to repeal it.
Padilla also voiced concern about Bondi's vocal support for Trump's failed attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election that Joe Biden won.
'I remain deeply concerned about Ms. Bondi's willingness to go on national television and propagate lies about the results of a free and fair election despite a total lack of evidence,' Padilla said.
With the party line vote recommending Bondi's confirmation, the matter now goes to the Senate floor for a final vote.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a judiciary committee member, also opposed Bondi.
QUOTE OF THE DAY
'Lawyers' Committee and our partners vow to challenge this unconstitutional law in court. We will not stand by while the rights of immigrants and communities of color are trampled for political gain.'
- Bianca Sierra Wolff, executive director at Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, in a statement.
Best of The Bee:
Donald Trump pulls federal funding for transgender minors' gender-affirming health care, via Jenavieve Hatch.
Trump said he was 'unleashing American energy.' Now, several highway projects are stalled, via Andrew Sheeler.
Sacramento has contracts of over $1 million with leader accused of bribery in mayor's race, via Joe Rubin.
California pension beneficiaries send billions in economic ripples across the state, via William Melhado.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Kentucky Senate candidate backs Trump's ‘Reagan-esque' strength in Putin, Zelenskyy talks
Kentucky Senate candidate Nate Morris joins 'Fox News Live' to discuss his fight for Sen. Mitch McConnell's seat, the latest on the redistricting feud and more.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Harrison: As Texas and California talk redistricting, there's no fight in Mississippi
Don't look for Mississippi to get involved in what appears to be an escalating redistricting war where states redraw their U.S. House districts to aid Republicans or Democrats ahead of a hotly contested 2026 national election. Mississippi most likely will not engage in the redistricting battle because Republicans already have been helped about as much as possible in the Magnolia State. Here, there are three safe Republican U.S. House districts and one safe Democratic district. In theory, the Mississippi Legislature could draw the congressional districts in such a manner as to make all four districts favor Republicans. But to do so, Black voters, who generally are more prone to vote Democratic, would have to be diluted to such an extent that the redraw would conflict with long-held federal court rulings. From a legal standpoint and even from an ethical and moral standpoint, it would be difficult to justify no Black-majority districts in Mississippi, where the non-white population is nearing 40%. Unsurprisingly, Texas fired the first shot in what is shaping up as a nationwide redistricting battle. The Texas Legislature, at the behest of President Donald Trump, who fears his Republican Party will lose the U.S. House in the 2026 midterm election, is trying to redraw the Longhorn State's 38 congressional districts to give the Republicans five more seats. They currently have 25. In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom is threatening to retaliate by creating more Democratic districts. California currently has 43 Democratic districts and nine Republican districts. There have been rumblings of blue New York and red Florida also going back to the redistricting drawing board to create more seats to help their respective party. Normally, redistricting is conducted every 10 years after the release of the U.S. Census. The last redistricting occurred after the 2020 U.S. Census. But it should be no surprise that Trump, fearing that Republicans will lose the House in 2026, asked Texas to eschew the norms and conduct a mid-decade redistricting. Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of gerrymandering or of drawing districts to benefit their political party. The courts, generally, have said that is OK. But the courts — at least in the past — have also said their minority populations must be given opportunities to elect candidates of their choice. While the courts have said gerrymandering is allowed, a recent Economist/YouGov poll found an overwhelming 69% oppose the partisan drawing of districts, compared to only 9% who support it and 22% of respondents who are unsure. A plurality of 35% support states retaliating if another state draws districts to support one particular party. The retaliation is opposed by 30%, while 36% of respondents are unsure. A plurality also opposes Trump's call for the FBI to hunt down Texas Democratic lawmakers who have fled the state to prevent the Legislature from having the quorum needed to draw new congressional districts. For what it's worth, a study by the Princeton Gerrymandering Project found 15 states with failing grades in terms of non-partisan redistricting. Nine of those states failed because of their strong Republican tilt, while five failed because of strong Democratic leanings. Two — Tennessee and Louisiana — failed because of racial unfairness. Through court rulings, a new Black-majority district has been created in Louisiana since the Princeton study was conducted. Texas and Florida were among the states receiving failing grades. New York and California were not. Another large Democratic stronghold, Illinois, did get a failing grade. Mississippi is unique because of its racial makeup and voting patterns. Most white Mississippians vote Republican, but the large Black minority — the largest percentage of Black voters in the nation — tends to vote Democratic. While Republicans have won all statewide elections since 2016, the elections often are relatively close. In the latest redistricting, Democrats argued that because of the strong pro-Democratic minority population, one of the three heavily Republican congressional districts should be drawn in a manner to make it more competitive. But the majority-Republican Legislature rejected that argument. Hence, there is no need for the Republicans in the Mississippi Legislature to undertake redistricting now. This column was produced by Mississippi Today, a nonprofit news organization that covers state government, public policy, politics and culture. Bobby Harrison is the editor of Mississippi Today Ideas.
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Who's REALLY ‘destroying democracy' — after failing to win voters legitimately?
'Destroying democracy' — the latest theme of the left — can be defined in many ways. How about attempting to destroy constitutional, ancient and hallowed institutions simply to suit short-term political gains? So, who in 2020, and now once again, has boasted about packing the 156-year-old, nine-justice Supreme Court? Who talks frequently about destroying the 187-year-old Senate filibuster — though only when they hold a Senate majority? Who wants to bring in an insolvent left-wing Puerto Rico and redefine the 235-year-old District of Columbia — by altering the Constitution — as two new states solely to obtain four additional liberal senators? Who is trying to destroy the constitutionally mandated 235-year Electoral College by circumventing it with the surrogate 'The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact?' Does destroying democracy also entail weaponizing federal bureaucracies, turning them into rogue partisan arms of a president? So who ordered the CIA to concoct bogus charges of 'collusion' to sabotage Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, the 2016-2017 transition, and the first 22 months of Trump's first term? Who prompted a cabal of '51 former intelligence officials' to lie to the American people on the eve of the last debate of the 2020 election that the FBI-authenticated Hunter Biden laptop was instead the work of a 'Russian intelligence operation?' Who ordered the FBI to connive and partner with social-media conglomerates to censor accurate news deemed unhelpful to the 2020 Biden campaign? Who pulled off the greatest presidential coup in history by using surrogates in the shadows to run the cognitively debilitated Biden presidency, then by fiat canceled his reelection effort and finally anointed as his replacement the new nominee Kamala Harris, who had never won a single primary delegate? Who ordered FBI SWAT teams to invade the home of a former president because of a classification dispute over 102 files out of some 13,000 stored there? Who tried to remove an ex-president and leader of his party from at least 25 state ballots to deprive millions of Americans of the opportunity to vote for or against him? Who coordinated four local, state and federal prosecutors to destroy a former and future president by charging him with fantasy crimes that were never before, and will never again be, lodged against anyone else? Who appointed a federal prosecutor to go after the ex-president, who arranged for a high-ranking Justice Department official to step down to join a New York prosecutor's efforts to destroy an ex-president, and who met in the White House with a Georgia county prosecutor seeking to destroy an ex-president — all on the same day — a mere 72 hours after Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid? Who but the current Democrats ever impeached a president twice? Has any party ever tried an ex-president in the Senate when he was out of office and a mere private citizen? When have there ever been two near-miss assassination attempts on a major party presidential candidate during a single presidential campaign? Who destroyed the southern border and broke federal law to allow in, without criminal or health background audits, some 10 million to 12 million illegal aliens? Who created 600 'sanctuary jurisdictions' for the sole purpose of nullifying federal immigration law, in the eerie spirit of the renegade old Confederacy? Who allowed tens of thousands of rioters, arsonists and violent protesters over four months in 2020 to destroy over $2 billion in property, kill some 35 people, injure 1,500 police officers and torch a federal courthouse, a police precinct and a historic church — all with de facto legal impunity? How do the purported destroyers of democracy find themselves winning 60% to 70% approval on most of the key issues of our times, while the supposed saviors of democracy are on the losing side of popular opinion? How does a president 'destroy democracy' by his party winning the White House by both the popular and Electoral College vote, winning majorities in both the Senate and House by popular votes and enjoying a 6-3 edge in the Supreme Court through judges appointed by popularly elected presidents? So what is behind these absurd charges? Three catalysts: One, the new anguished elitist Democratic Party alienated the middle classes through its Jacobin agenda and therefore lost the Congress, the presidency and the Supreme Court, and now has no federal political power. Two, the Democratic Party is polling at record lows and yet remains hellbent on alienating the traditional sources of its power — minorities, youth and Independents. Three, Democrats cannot find any issues that the people support, nor any leaders to convince the people to embrace them. So it is no surprise that the panicked Democrats bark at the shadows — given that they know their revolutionary, neo-socialist agenda is destroying them. And yet, like all addicts, they choose destruction over abandoning their self-destructive fixations. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
