Sometimes Politicians Pass Laws For Headlines, Rather Than To Make An Impact

My criticism of the new climate change law passed by the state of New York

Dec 28, 2024

person writing on white paper — Photo by Signature Pro on Unsplash

I know one thing for certain - it’s going to be a long 4 years as we enter another Trump administration. While we embark on this next chapter of our nation’s existence, it’ll be natural to cling onto stories that feel (on the surface) like major wins opposing the new regime.

When it comes to climate change particularly, we all know that Donald Trump has absolutely no desire to help stave off the climate crisis. In fact, the only pro-climate words he can regularly muster are “I want clean air and clean water”

Yet, through the first 2 years of his first term in office, Trump approved over 6,000 permits for oil and natural gas drilling & moved America out of the Paris climate agreement. By the end of his term, his administration had rolled back 98 environmental rules and regulations, leaving an additional 14 rollbacks still in progress.

It’s worth noting that Donald Trump does not believe that climate change will have devastating impacts on the Earth, or that carbon dioxide is the primary contributor to climate change. He scrapped the previous “clean power plan” and replaced it with his own policy that would not cap emissions on vehicles. The result increased U.S. emissions by one-fifth.

Let’s not forget that he also went out of his way to give the chemical industry a win, by rewriting the EPA’s pollution-control policy. That was after he repealed the ‘Clean Water Rule’.

In short - even the few things he claimed to care about “clean water and clean air” were a complete lie (as if you needed me to tell you that Trump is a pathological liar).

Knowing what we know about Donald Trump & my philosophy that the ‘past is the best predictor of the future’, I feel confident saying his next administration will be similar if not worse on climate policy.

Which is by headlines like this will feel incredibly compelling to see ⬇️

Let’s take a moment to really take in this headline.

It’s a breath of fresh air to see any new climate legislation coming out. I mean, let’s be honest, we’re no where near where we should be regarding addressing the climate crisis as a nation. I know personally, when I came across this headline, it definitely brought my mood up.

While defenders of the outgoing Biden administration will defend his record on the environment, I see a bunch of missed opportunities and a continued investment in fossil fuels, that looked similar to the Trump administration. With Biden actually surpassing the number of oil and gas permits he authorized in his term, compared to Trump’s first term.

So, as an individual who desperately wants to see action on this front, I welcomed the news coming out of New York.

Unfortunately, that wasn’t the whole story.

Depending on which study you look at, you might get a slightly different number. Some say 70%, others say 80%, those were the most common, but that was the general range; Americans for the most part, do not read passed the headline. We are a cultural dominated by quick consumption.

I don’t mean this to come off condescending either, because I’m also guilty of this. I have my fair share of times where I too react solely to a headline, even though I know better. I felt myself almost falling victim to it again with this particular story, but thankfully I decided to read a little more into this one.

Which leads me to the entire reason I decided to write this piece in the first place.

Politicians are also aware of this fact & they CONSTANTLY use headline culture to their political benefit. As long as the perception of accomplishment is present, they can use that as a tool when furthering their career.

And let’s be honest, while we would like to believe that these people take these positions of power to benefit society, they mostly use them to enrich themselves & angle for their next (hopefully larger) position of power.

Side note📝 ⬇️

That’s not to say good politicians do not exist, but they are so rare, it’s hard to even recognize they’re around whatsoever. Usually the good ones remain

At your local level
Occasionally they sneak into state legislatures
They’re might be like 10 in Congress 🤷🏾‍♂️
Then we have Lina Khan & a handful of people at the NLRB (it’s debatable if these people can even be considered “politicians”)

And don’t look now, but 2028 is right around the corner, and you can be sure that Democrats around the country will be vying for positive headlines, as the positioning begins for the upcoming Democratic Primary Election.

Without anymore delay, allow me to highlight the reasons why I felt this particular story felt more like an attempt to win a headline, versus an actual attempt to generate change…

First, I’m going to share a few paragraphs from the AP News’ recent article on the passage of this new law ⬇️

Large fossil fuel companies would have to pay fees to help New York fight the effects of climate change under a bill signed Thursday by Gov. Kathy Hochul.
The new law requires companies responsible for substantial greenhouse gas emissions to pay into a state fund for infrastructure projects meant to repair or avoid future damage from climate change.
Lawmakers approved the bill earlier this year to force big oil and gas companies to contribute to the cost of repairs after extreme weather events and resiliency projects such as coastal wetland restoration and upgrades to roads, bridges and water drainage systems.
“The Climate Change Superfund Act is now law, and New York has fired a shot that will be heard round the world: the companies most responsible for the climate crisis will be held accountable,” said state Sen. Liz Krueger, a Democrat who sponsored the bill.
The biggest emitters of greenhouse gases between 2000 and 2018 would be subjected to the fines. - AP News 12/26/24

All of this sounds reasonable and good so far, but now let me point out what caught my attention ⬇️

The law won’t start penalizing companies immediately. Instead, the state must come up with rules on how to identify responsible parties, notify companies of the fines and create a system to determine which infrastructure projects will be paid for by the fund. Legal challenges are expected. AP News 12/26/24

I’m just going to say this right off the top, any time you don’t specify how something will be implemented, it will later be amended to benefit the powerful. There is no good reason why you would implement something like this, without any enforcement guidelines already in place, unless you’re not too interested in enforcing this law at all.

Some might see this as a “they’re trying their best” moment, but I think this hollowed out law was presented this way on purpose.

A great attempt to grab a headline about addressing climate change, while in all actuality, the law doesn’t even provide an enforcement mechanism, nor have they figured out how much of a fine they’re going to hand down to these corporations.

In summary

You passed a law that doesn’t know when it will start penalizing companies
You did not determine what the criteria will be for penalizing companies
You did not determine how much you will be penalizing companies
And the law is shaky enough to where it’ll be challenged in court

However, most people will never know any of those things, because again, we are a cultural dominated by headline consumption & that headline sure is attractive. Especially in an era where left-leaning voters will be starved for any good news whatsoever. It’s the perfect opportunity for Democrats to pass performative, toothless, laws & soak in the adulation as “resistance warriors”.

Independent Thought

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?