Drilled Presents...Spill: Mary Annaise Heglar & Amy Westervelt on climate in this week's debate, Project 2025, and a whole lot more
Sep 9, 2024
auto_awesome
Mary Annaise Heglar, an advocate for climate rethinking, and journalist Amy Westervelt dive deep into Project 2025 and its implications for climate policy. They share frustrations about the disconnection in current climate advocacy, critique the historical ties of environmental movements to social justice, and discuss the risks associated with privatizing weather data. They also tackle the ethical dilemmas in climate journalism and the shifting dynamics of political engagement as they humorously examine voter sentiments leading into the election.
Project 2025's approach prioritizes political appointees over scientific expertise, jeopardizing the integrity of climate-related policymaking and public health.
The initiative threatens to dismantle environmental justice efforts, exacerbating inequalities and neglecting marginalized communities in climate policy discussions.
Deep dives
Impact of Project 2025 on Climate Policymaking
Project 2025 outlines a strategy that seeks to heavily influence climate-related policymaking in the U.S. by promoting the appointment of individuals without scientific backgrounds to key environmental positions. The emphasis on political over scientific qualifications raises concerns about undermining scientific integrity in environmental regulations. Critically, it suggests a shift towards prioritizing political agendas over empirical data, potentially leading to decisions that could harm public health and environmental protection. This approach signals a broader trend that may stifle legitimate science and progress in addressing climate change.
The Role of Environmental Justice
The initiative proposes to dismantle existing environmental justice initiatives and offices, which traditionally focus on addressing the disproportionate effects of environmental issues on marginalized communities. This move is framed as an effort to eliminate what they term 'reverse racism,' showcasing a troubling disregard for historical inequities. The approach taken by Project 2025 indicates a potential erasure of environmental justice as a critical pillar in climate policy discourse. By sidelining these efforts, the proposal risks exacerbating existing inequalities and neglecting vulnerable populations in policy considerations.
Erosion of Scientific Oversight
Project 2025 also seeks to diminish scientific oversight in the environmental regulatory process, advocating for a more politically motivated approach to decision-making. The proposal includes provisions for sidelining scientific assessments and critiques of environmental policies, labeling scientific concerns as politically biased. For example, there are plans to remove vital environmental regulations based on the idea that they are politically driven rather than scientifically necessary. Such an erosion of scientific authority may lead to a lack of essential environmental protections at a time when they are needed most.
Privatization of Environmental Data and Services
A significant aspect of Project 2025 involves privatizing weather and environmental data services, with intentions to fold agencies like NOAA into other government departments or to replace them with private sector alternatives. This shift raises fears about the reliability and accessibility of crucial information regarding climate and weather events, including severe disasters. The claim that private companies could provide more reliable services overlooks the public’s need for unbiased and comprehensive data that current government programs offer. Moreover, this privatization could lead to increased costs for accessing critical public information necessary for effective disaster preparedness and response.
This week we bring you an episode of our climate talk show, Spill, for a deep dive from Mary Annaïse Heglar and Amy Westervelt on what Project 2025 lays out for climate, what we might hear (and not hear) about climate in this week's presidential debate, rethinking the climate movement and politics, and more.