Skip to main content

Rising Waters


           For many years the phrase “climate change” has been used as a buzz word that caused arguments to start up about the validity of the argument. While those arguments are still happening, the conversation in the US Congress has started to shift.

           Historically, climate change was not a topic that was being brought to the floor until about 1992 when the Senate approved the UN framework for a global agreement on climate change. However, it took over 20 years for the first committee to be formed to only address climate change issues (C2ES). And even though, during that time, the Senate passed legislation to address climate change, they have yet to be amended to match new studies and projections that are more recent. These policies are just now starting to be reevaluated to reflect changes that need to be made in response to changes in weather patterns and water levels.
The chart to the right shows the amount of rainfall and groundwater that is across the nation in 2012 (SOS). This can be indicative of areas that are at risk for floods in the future, yet, this chart has not been updated within the last 7 years. The same goes for charts predicting the intensity and frequency of tropical storms. In the past 4 years, there have been 5 category 5 hurricanes, but charts used in policymaking do not reflect that.
            The National Flood Insurance Policy is a 50-year-old policy that needs to be reauthorized by the end of this month, but there have been changes brought to the floor that Senate needs to evaluate. The reforms include “$500 million a year for five years for flood mapping and a five year pilot program to increase insurance affordability” and “more resources for flood risk reduction, including $200 million each year for five years for the flood mitigation assistance program and funds for a state” (SOS). These changes will help states be able to address natural disasters better, it will give Congress the funding that it needs to be able to gather better research to make better policies and it will help those who are affected by the aftermath of a flood by working towards more affordable coverage.
Citations: 
“Congress Climate History.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 23 Oct. 2017, https://www.c2es.org/content/congress-climate-history/.

 Udvardy, Shana. “SOS Congress: Nation's Flood Policy Is Not Keeping Up with Climate Change Reality.” Union of Concerned Scientists, 18 Sept. 2019, https://blog.ucsusa.org/shana-udvardy/sos-congress-nations-flood-policy-is-not-keeping-up-with-climate-change-reality.

 “Congress Climate History.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 23 Oct. 2017, https://www.c2es.org/content/congress-climate-history/.
Udvardy, Shana. “SOS Congress: Nation's Flood Policy Is Not Keeping Up with Climate Change Reality.” Union of Concerned Scientists, 18 Sept. 2019, https://blog.ucsusa.org/shana-udvardy/sos-congress-nations-flood-policy-is-not-keeping-up-with-climate-change-reality.
“Congress Climate History.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 23 Oct. 2017, https://www.c2es.org/content/congress-climate-history/.

Udvardy, Shana. “SOS Congress: Nation's Flood Policy Is Not Keeping Up with Climate Change Reality.” Union of Concerned Scientists, 18 Sept. 2019, https://blog.ucsusa.org/shana-udvardy/sos-congress-nations-flood-policy-is-not-keeping-up-with-climate-change-reality.

Comments

  1. Kaylin BrooksSeptember 24, 2019 at 10:20 PM

    Hi! Well written post. I like how you explain how climate change has been discussed in congress through history. It's always shocking to see that little is being done about legislation to help prevent climate change when science shows the dangers and constituents are speaking out. The interesting part I noticed about your blog is the discussion on National Flood insurance Policy. I would think that many legislators would not directly tie flood mitigation and climate change mitigation (even though most know they are tied due to climate changes impacts). But without that buzz word of "climate change" directly used, then you would think most lawmakers would be keen to helping prevent floods... I may be wrong but this was just a strange idea that came to me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Brennan LittleSeptember 25, 2019 at 4:29 PM

    Chloe, I really enjoyed your blog post. Climate change is definitely an issue that I am not very well educated on, but I absolutely wish I was. When reflecting on this, I started to think back to grade school and about whether or not there was any real effort to educate students on the issues of climate change. Looking back, there was never a serious effort that I can remember. I wonder if this is why so little action has occurred, even though scientists are showing clear evidence on climate change. One would think that everyone would be supportive of saving the planet, but even minor changes have yet to be seen in the legislature, as far as I understand. My question is, is there conflicting arguments largely because of money that Republicans think would be better spent elsewhere? I don't quite understand the reasoning behind not supporting helping to save the planet, but I hope change comes about soon.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Proposition DD: Let the Bets Flow

On November 5 th , 2019, one of the two measures placed on the ballot in Colorado was Proposition DD, giving the electorate a referendum on the legality of sports betting within the state; it also would impose a tax upon the net revenue of those establishments accepting such bets, the majority of which would provide funding for the Colorado Water Plan and the remainder of which would be used to regulate sports betting and provide services for gambling addiction. Since 1992, gambling on the outcome of most sporting events had been outlawed nationally under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, or PASPA, though with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association , this Act was deemed unconstitutional, and state legislatures became free to legislate regarding sports betting and its legality. Proposition DD was put to a public ballot under the provisions of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution, a ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’ ...
2 comments
Read more

The Proponents of Proposition DD

Proposition DD and its proponents One of the most significant and noteworthy results of the recent elections in Colorado was the passing of Proposition DD. A legislative proposition is a proposal placed on the ballot by the state legislature itself. The legislature in Denver referred the measure with House Bill 1327 during the spring season, with easy bipartisan support. [1] The proposition however did not receive such widespread support from the public, only narrowly passing, and being too close to call on election night. This is illustrated below. [2] The passage of Proposition DD legalised gambling on sports events, beginning in six months’ time; making Colorado the nineteenth state to legalise sports betting. Colorado’s seventeen casino operators will be eligible to apply for licenses for both physical and online sportsbooks, with the Colorado Division of Gaming being tasked to regulate the market. [3] ‘Yes on Proposition DD’ raised about $2.83 million for ca...
Post a Comment
Read more

Immigration Visas and Polarization

Megan King  The story I decided to investigate in National News is , “ Federal Judges Block Trump Policy Targeting Legal Immigrants on Public Benefits ” by Claire Hansen demonstrates how difficult the policymaking procedure can be. In regard to the separations of powers, this ideology does give each branch equal representation, which in this case was to block a new policy. In this situation, three judges filed lawsuits because the new policy the Government was going to implement that visas could be denied if they think that immigrants who are going to use public benefits. It is known as the “public charge” policy which is basically, “any individual who is deemed likely to accept a benefit is considered a public charger” which was just another attempt from the Trump Administration desiring to stop immigration (Hansen). There has already been policies in place that set up circumstances that Immigration Courts and the Government have set up to deny immigration residence just in...
2 comments
Read more