The US Congress has a $1.7 trillion spending bill that is at risk of being shut down

The U.S. is the largest economy in the world, according to Biden: “The problem of climate change in the 21st century is not going to end”

During the United Nations General Assembly in September, it was something Biden raised in speeches to other world leaders.

Biden will reiterate his goal of helping the most vulnerable build resilience to climate impacts when he speaks about U.S. efforts to cut carbon emissions at a UN climate summit in Egypt on Friday.

But it remains unclear whether the president will be able to meet his goal — particularly if Republicans make gains in midterm elections this week — because Congress has been reluctant to spend as much money as Biden has asked for.

The United States is the world’s largest economy in terms of greenhouse gas pollution. It has done more over time to warm the planet than any other nation, although China now emits more on a per-year basis.

The United States, like other countries, is required to submit a report every two years to the United Nations documenting progress on its climate goals. The Trump administration didn’t file any reports for those two years.

Climate change measures are allocated less than 1% of the funding in the entire NDAA. Climate- change funds often include infrastructure investments for base resiliency and vehicle electrification projects.

Compared to the other countries involved, the U.S. invests a lot of money, but a relatively small amount relative to its economy.

Why is it going to be hard forbiden to meet this 11 billion climate change pledge? The challenge facing Biden and Barrasso

The UN’s report stated that the pledge is many times lower than what needs to be done to tackle the climate crisis.

The administration has two main sources of funds it hopes to draw from: appropriated funding from Congress, and money from federal development agencies.

The White House wants Congress to provide half the total pledge, $5.3 billion, to assist specific countries and to support large, international efforts like the Green Climate Fund.

Administration officials hope the second half will come from sources like the Export-Import Bank and the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), government agencies that use financial instruments like loans and insurance to advance U.S. policy goals abroad.

The first — and most immediate — hurdle that Biden faces is Congress. 60 votes are needed to approve a funding bill in the Senate. That means Democrats need to convince some Republican lawmakers to join them.

Wyoming Senator John Barrasso, the top Republican on the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources committee, denounced the White House’s proposal as a pipe dream of liberal activism.

And since the budget was released in the spring, the headwinds facing the administration have only gotten stronger. Inflation has remained stubbornly high, and some economists worry that interest rate hikes from the Federal Reserve could lead to a recession.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/11/08/1132980254/its-going-to-be-hard-for-biden-to-meet-this-11-billion-climate-change-promise

Identifying and partnering with government agencies to meet Biden’s pledge on climate change: Tonkonogy of the Climate Policy Initiative

Government development agencies are another source of money for Biden’s pledge. The agencies that lend out money and look to generate a return for their investments are the Export-Import Bank and the International Development Finance Corporation.

The DFC and the Export-Import Bank don’t get money from Congress but through fees and returns on their loans.

It’s possible that these agencies could scale up their spending on climate-focused programs to help meet the president’s pledge, according to Bella Tonkonogy of the Climate Policy Initiative, a nonprofit policy research organization.

“It’s not just about whether or not the government can find the money.”, warned Tonkonogy. It is questionable if these agencies can identify and vet quality projects in a timely manner.

“That will require working differently — from developing comprehensive climate strategies, to building up staff capacity, to partnering with other agencies,” Tonkonogy said.

WASHINGTON — Congressional leaders unveiled a government-wide $1.7 trillion spending package early Tuesday that includes another large round of aid to Ukraine, a nearly 10% boost in defense spending and roughly $40 billion to assist communities across the country recovering from drought, hurricanes and other natural disasters.

The bill runs for more than 4,000 pages and will last through the end of the fiscal year in September.

The spending package for 2023 is three months late. It was supposed to be done by October 1 of the fiscal year.

The Senate Majority Leader’s Implications for the United States: The Bipartisan Overturning of the 2023 Electoral Count Act

If our friends in Russia attempt to defeat us in Eastern Europe, America must stand by their side, according to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The legislation also includes historic revisions to federal election law that aim to prevent any future presidents or presidential candidates from trying to overturn an election. The bipartisan overhaul of the Electoral Count Act is in direct response to former President Donald Trump’s efforts to convince Republican lawmakers and then-Vice President Mike Pence to object to the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory on Jan. 6, 2021.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has warned that if the fiscal year 2023 spending measure fails to gain bipartisan support this week, he would seek another short-term patch into next year, guaranteeing that the new Republican majority in the House would get to shape the package.

Leahy argued against that approach in releasing the bill saying, “the choice is clear. We can either do our jobs and fund the government, or we can abandon our responsibilities without a real path forward.”

McConnell said the GOP’s negotiations went well. Even as many will vote against the bill, he made a strong case that it was a victory for the GOP. He said Republicans were successful in increasing defense spending far beyond Biden’s request while scaling back some of the increase Biden wanted for domestic spending.

In a statement, Shalanda Young said that neither side got everything they wanted in the deal. But she praised the measure as “good for our economy, our competitiveness, and our country, and I urge Congress to send it to the President’s desk without delay.”

Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/12/20/1144365502/congress-spending-omnibus-shutdown-bill

The Pelosi-Schumer Spending Measure: What Do We Still Don’t Know About the Pentagon’s Future?” Senator Scott, R-Fla, and a Democratic aide

The spending on non-defense programs will increase by about 6%. That number includes a 22% increase for VA medical care to help pay for an expansion of health care services and benefits to veterans exposed to toxic burn pits during their service. The funding increases for some agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Park Service, doesn’t keep up with inflation.

The bill was delayed because of a disagreement over the location of the FBI’s future headquarters. Maryland lawmakers have argued that ensuring predominately Black communities get their fair share of federal investments should be more thoroughly considered as part of the selection process. The headquarters should be built at one of the two sites in Prince George’s County, which is a majority-Black county. The headquarters are also being competed for by Virginia.

A Senate Democratic aide familiar with the negotiations said Schumer worked to incorporate language in the spending bill ensuring the General Service Administration conduct “separate and detailed consultations” with lawmakers representing the Maryland and Virginia sites to get their perspectives.

The last time Congress enacted all its spending bills by then was in 1996, when the Senate finished its work on Sept. 30, the very last day of the budget year. President Clinton signed it that day.

The Senate is expected to vote on the spending bill first where support from at least 10 Republican senators will be needed to pass it before the measure is considered by the House. As has been the case with recent catchall spending bills, lawmakers voiced concerns about passing legislation containing thousands of pages on short notice.

“We still haven’t seen a single page of the Pelosi-Schumer spending bill, and they’re expecting us to pass it by the end of this week,” tweeted Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla. “It’s insane.”

McConnell said he shares “many of my colleagues dissatisfaction” with the process. He cited national security concerns for wanting to pass the bill and warned that failure to do so would “gave our armed forces confusion and uncertainty.”

The consistency of calls from the White House, Congress, and experts contribute to a discussion about America’s response to the warming of the polar region. It is complicating the issue of building on thawing permafrost, because the land is sinking as it warms.

“What we are seeing now is really dramatic, and I think it’s because of that.” Sfraga told students at Duke University last year. “[T]he Arctic has warmed nearly four times the global average.”

The northern latitudes have not been a fertile area for exploitation, because indigenous communities have been able to live in harmony with the land. Until sea ice began rapidly receding, oil, gas, shipping and minerals were all under frigid lock and key.

Plans are already underway for the U.S. military; their training and tech is evolving to meet the environmental conditions and some Coast Guard ice-breaking vessels are in the works. More will be added in the coming months and years.

Russia has already ramped up its military presence and the United States is playing catch-up. The national security threat posed by Russia and China will top the list of challenges, according to Lisa Murkowski’s team.

Military spending on a changing climate has the potential to outpace mitigation spending from the U.S. government in bills like Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, and the U.N.’s spending on programs like the Green Climate Fund, its largest climate adaptation and mitigation purse.

Both Russia and China have plans for the region. Both nations, just as the U.S. has, acknowledge the seriousness of global climate change and the effect it has on the sea ice. A 2020 study published in Nature Climate Change projects iceless summers in the Arctic in just over a decade.

“Russia under Putin envisions a toll road for transit across the northern sea route that would transit goods and energy from Asia to ports in Europe,” Goodman says. “And as part of that, he has militarized and nuclearized the Arctic to ensure that ships requiring access would have to rely on Russia’s icebreaking escort. There has been more aggressive military behavior by Russia.

It is not clear how the threat of storm severity, sea ice scarcity and food insecurity are considered in relation to grand money making ventures in the northern latitude.

Climate change is “driving mission for the Department of Defense,” Joe Bryan, special climate adviser to the DOD, told the Brookings Institution last year. “On the supply side, we’re having to work harder to meet that demand.”

They have an abundance of airfields, missile systems, dozens of icebreakers — some of which are nuclear powered — and they conduct military exercises in the region.

The arms gap is filled by the U.S., from bipartisan congressional prerogatives to the White House’s commitment to increase the capabilities needed to defend our interests in theArctic.

Rep. Michael Waltz, R-Fla., chair of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness, told NPR the armed services face an extreme operational challenge that needs to be met with training and resources, including a base on the northern coast of Alaska. The Navy and Coast Guard don’t have enough vessels that can traverse the ice.

I believe we’re at two operational icebreakers, according to him. The Russians have dozens and we’re outgunned in both presence and ability.

We’re way behind. We may need to lease some of the icebreakers from other countries and use them for our Coast Guard and military, much to my disappointment. And that’ll come into [the next] NDAA.”

The most recent DOD spending bill mandated a report detailing the feasibility of Navy Destroyers equipped with icebreaking capability for the Alp, which would cost over $1 billion each to build.

Even though the Republicans hold the House, Garamendi doesn’t expect to see DOD funding cut in the northern part of the country because of climate change.

He thinks the House Armed Services Committee will push forward. “And the icebreakers are on everybody’s mind now. … It is an accepted problem and I believe that we’ll stay on track.”