This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.

Post

The Greatest Crisis Facing the Nation May Not Be Climate Change

image credit: Lead image courtesy of Tyler Merbler under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license
Joel Stronberg's picture
President The JBS Group

Stronberg is a senior executive and attorney with over 40 years of experience in federal and state energy, environmental and sustainability issues. He is the founder and principal of The JBS...

  • Member since 2018
  • 232 items added with 515,075 views
  • Jul 7, 2022
  • 628 views

 

  • American democracy is broken.
  • What good are answers if the system can’t implement them?
  • Senate Minority Leader McConnell and Chief Justice Roberts are telling us something We the People need to consider as we vote in 2022 and 2024
  • Before climate change or any other issue of the day is adequately dealt with, the political system must be repaired.
  • The “fix” can only come about when rational truth-based debate replaces the slings and arrows of today’s political tribalism.
The Supreme Court has abandoned a fifty-year precedent at a time when the country is desperate for stability.

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME)

Introduction

Answer me this — if you can’t trust the word of a Supreme Court Justice, who can you trust? It’s a question many in the nation are asking themselves in the wake of the Supreme Court’s overturning Roe v Wade by its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health.

Roe is 50-year-old case that made abortion a constitutionally protected right of women. The US Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) decision means it’s now up to the states to write the rules. According to PEW Research, 26 states are certain or likely to ban abortion based on the Dobbs decision.

Before his confirmation, Justice Kavanaugh told Republican and Democratic senators that Roe is considered settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, entitled [to] the respect under principles of stare decisis (Emphasis added) — which is Latin for to stand by things (previously) decided. Justice Gorsuch gave similar assurances to Senators Collins (R-ME) and Manchin (D-WV).

So, what caused them to break their words? The answer is nothing — other than the two justices being confirmed for lifetime positions on the nation’s high court bench.

The public announcement in Dobbs came as no surprise. The real shocker happened earlier when Justice Alito’s draft majority opinion found its way out of judges’ chambers and onto the front pages and websites of nearly every media outlet in the land. It was the first time in Supreme Court history that a complete draft of a decision became public before its official release.

What was most alarming about Dobbs, beyond decision the decision itself, was the reversal of Roe in a single swoop. Ordinarily, the Supreme Court walks back decisions of such import in smaller steps. Although complete 180-degree turns have happened, they are the rare exception to stare decisis.

Why the smaller steps? The steady phasing into a new regime gives society a chance to catch up. Think of the shock to society — North and South — that Brown v. Board of Education had on America in 1954.

Because of a string of previous decisionsBrown was expected. Moreover, the high court refrained from ordering immediate dismantlement of the dual school system, leaving the formulation of specific orders and policies in the hands of district courts and elected lawmakers.

How much more volatile would the resistance to desegregation have been had the Brown decision come without warning, i.e., cases decided before, as in RoeLasting cultural change rarely happens quickly; it’s a process.

Chief Justice Roberts believed the conservative majority could have achieved what they wanted — to uphold the Mississippi law — without sweeping 50 years of precedence into the judicial dust bin.

The Court’s decision to overrule Roe and Casey[i] is a serious jolt to the legal system — regardless of how you view those cases. A narrower decision …would be markedly less unsettling, and nothing more is needed to decide this case.

In 2015[ii], the high court described the rationale behind the stare decisis doctrine as promoting the evenhanded, predictableand consistent development of legal principles, fostering reliance on judicial decisions, and contributing to the actual and perceived integrity of the judicial process. (Emphasis added)

Roberts is expressing the tack the Supreme Court has historically taken. However, recently announced SCOTUS decisions in the just-concluded term suggest that slow and steady will not be the way of the newly conservative Roberts court.

The looming questions facing Democrats and their -how far and how fast are the six conservative justices prepared to return federal powers to the states and the nation to the 1970s and what Democrats can do about it.

Evenhandedpredictableconsistent, and integrity are not just words. They are the rudiments of American democracy.

The Dobbs decision is unsettling for several reasons, starting with the broken promises of Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Senator Manchin said of the Roe decision —

I trusted Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh when they testified under oath that they also believed Roe v. Wade was settled legal precedent, and I am alarmed they chose to reject the stability the ruling has provided for two generations of Americans. (Emphasis added)

Roe and Dobbs are about more than the protected right of women to make their own decisions concerning their health and welfare. Abortion has been a major point of contention between Republicans and Democrats since Roe was decided in 1973. A war that must be settled — peacefully if not amicably — for the sake of the nation.

Democrats win votes in urban and coastal areas; Republicans gain seats in the rural middle of the country.

I’ll be blunt. American democracy is broken. Until it is repaired, the nation’s policymakers will be even less capable of addressing the critical issues of the day — climate change, inflation, healthcare, immigration, and justice — than they’ve already shown themselves to be.

Does this mean war?

The cultural differences between red states and blue and between blue cities and red states are pronounced. They’re becoming more significant with time.

No alt text provided for this image

It’s as if Democrats and Trump-centric Republicans — perhaps all Republicans — are living in different realities. To an extent, that divide is true — at least true enough for government work. Frank Jacobs describes the two worlds in this oversimplified[iii] definition:

Those opposing blocs, according to Jacobs, consolidated into red and blue countries — euphemistically speaking — decades ago. The breakdown of states along the lines of those banning abortion overlays neatly with those where Republicans — many of whom are Trump-centric — voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020.

Senate Minority Leader McConnell agrees with Jacobs’ definition of the nation’s voting blocs and his assessment that suburban voters be the deciding factor in the coming midterms and the 2024 presidential elections. The Democrats have the same need to convince suburban voters as the GOP.

It is no secret that we have lost ground in suburban areas. We pretty much own rural and small-town America, and I think this is a sensible solution to the problem before us, which is school safety and mental health.

Turnout is generally low for midterm elections. At least until a week or two ago, Republican voters appeared to have more enthusiasm to cast their votes than the Democrats. The party of Lincoln and Trump has smelled blood in the water since Biden was sworn in as president.

The Supreme Court’s decisions in the waning weeks of its term on issues ranging from carrying concealed weapons to EPA’s authority to regulate harmful greenhouse gas emissions may have changed things — particularly for suburban voters.

A recent survey asking Will the US have another civil war found that 46 percent of the participants thought we would[iv]. I would have said the poll question was nonsense a few years ago. Now, I’m not so sure, and the thought is sobering.

No alt text provided for this image

We, the People, need to ponder the problems we’re having with each other carefully and honestly — because they’re eating away at the foundation on which nearly 250 years of American democracy rests.

As tensions between the tribal political parties increase, so does the possibility of another civil war. We’re talking about an actual shooting war between Americans where no quarter is given.

Picture scenes like the January 6th seditious assault on the US Capitol being directed against state and local seats of government, businesses, churches, and schools — but on a scale and intensity closer to Putin’s war on Ukraine.

Think another civil war is an impossibility? We already have evidence of the depth of the national division in plots to kidnap governors and armed men who stake out the homes of Supreme Court Justices.

Trump’s base is roughly thirty percent of the nation’s voters, many of whom want to turn his lies about the past into a future reality that undermines the Republic — and for what, a bully’s ego?

We are a nation in crisis — looming out there is a potential calamity that trumps all others. It is a crisis from within.

Extremes beget extremes. The tension between the warring parties keeps things in near-constant turmoil — opening the door to demagogues and oligarchs.

How can We, the People, and our leaders solve society-based problems of healthcare and climate — of inflation and national security — when we can’t even agree if Joe Biden legitimately won the White House in a free and fair election or whether the assault on the Capitol was seditious or just some rambunctious tourists anxious to see Congress at work and the hanging of Vice President Pence.

The longer the culture war continues, the harder it will be to pull society back from the brink. There will be too much downward momentum to turn a ship of state as large and laden as the US.

Political compromise has never been easy. Tribalism has made it nearly impossible.

In an era of easy epithets

Trump didn’t start the culture war(s). However, he normalized and helped galvanize the feelings of disaffected voters and brought them under his titular command as the head of the Republican Party and president.

A lesser Huey Long, Trump tells his largely White working-class supporters that it’s OK to be angry about their lot in life and that they are right to expect to prosper. After all, this is America, and America is theirs by birthright — others need not apply.

No alt text provided for this image

Trump’s the damaged darling of a significant swath of the religious right. They know who he is and what he is but support him anyway. Perhaps they believe the end justifies the means? In any event, they see a divine hand at work in the irony of a sinner like Trump wanting to carry their cross.

The former President hasn’t just normalized the anger of his base. He’s given them targets to shoot at — RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) and the Woke.

Who the “Woke” are exactly remains something of a mystery. However, it’s a safe bet that Trump invokes it to define anyone who either doesn’t agree with him or has said it’s time to move beyond the 2020 elections.

The former President has managed to take reality out of the policy debateThere’s no place for truth in Trump’s lexicon. He’s weaponized facts by making them part of the tribal struggle he’s peddling.

Trump routinely vilifies and humiliates the messenger who dares to bring him any bad news. Dr. Fauci says it’s a good idea for people to wear masks.

Trump turns it into a tauntFauci is insulting you; he wants to take your freedomhe’s a Woke physician who doesn’t even know what he knows. The approach is an ideal cover for the former President’s seemingly gross ignorance of everything from the Constitution to climate science.

If what I say — no matter how ridiculous — is as true as what you say — no matter how preposterous — how will we ever agree on anything without it being a total defeat for one of us? How, too, can we find mutually acceptable solutions to the day’s problems without some way of distinguishing reality from bulls**t?

What’s left once you take facts out of the policy debate? Anarchy, nihilism, chaos — just the sort of conditions aspiring demagogues and oligarchs feed off — and get phat while doing it?

Note to readers. This is the first in an occasional series. Part 2 will pick up the conversation and highlight America First candidates’ rise in the 2022 party primaries and the midterm elections in November.

*****************

[i] Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case regarding abortion. In a plurality opinion, the Court upheld the right to have an abortion that was established in Roe v. Wade (1973),

[ii] Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC

[iii] Per his own description of relationship between reds and blues.

[iv] Younger respondents (aged 18 to 29) saw the prospect of a civil war in greater numbers (53 percent) than other age groups. Respondents 65 and older saw the chance of an uncivil conflict in the lowest numbers (31 percent).

Joel Stronberg's picture
Thank Joel for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member
Discussions
Spell checking: Press the CTRL or COMMAND key then click on the underlined misspelled word.
Benoit Marcoux's picture
Benoit Marcoux on Jul 8, 2022

Looking at this mess from Canada, it’s really puzzling, but it’s worrisome that some Canadian politicians would like to import American-style politics here.

Perhaps we should build a fence along the border to limit the flow of guns and illegal immigration coming to Canada. (Just kidding.)

Matt Chester's picture
Matt Chester on Jul 8, 2022

Don't worry Benoit, it's puzzling to those of us living here too!

Roger Arnold's picture
Roger Arnold on Jul 9, 2022

I'm happy to see this article appearing here. It's overtly political, and for that reason, some might say that it doesn't belong on Energy Central. I understand that position; I'm even sympathetic to it. I'd hate to see EC sucked into the black hole of raging political debate. There are other places for that, if that's what one wants to engage with.

In this case, however, I think the political issues that Joel writes about belong here. EC supports the clean energy and utilities communities; the issues raised are relevant to that mission. As Joel pointedly asks, what good are answers if they can't be implemented? 

Our system -- social, political, and economic -- has become alarmingly dysfunctional. I agree with Joel that that's an even bigger crisis than climate change. I don't see how we can do what's required for the latter, when the system we depend on to get anything done is broken. 

Michael Keller's picture
Michael Keller on Jul 11, 2022

What a bunch of leftists fascist drivel. Typical of radicals who steam-roll over, including resorting to violence, anyone who objects to the democratic party’s vicious dogma. Therein lies the fundamental problem with the left: the utter lack of integrity. That lack of integrity breeds massive distrust and inevitably leads to strife, with no likelihood of compromise with the left that is threatening the existence of the republic.

 

Daniel Duggan's picture
Daniel Duggan on Jul 12, 2022

This post is a political rant and should not have been published on The Energy Collective because one rant leads to another from the opposite opinion, and down the slippery slope we go.   

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »