Project 2025 and Climate Change
At one time or another, each of us has been or will be affected by severe weather. It may have been a heat wave, thunderstorm, hurricane, tornado, blizzard, polar vortex, or flood. (Consider the southeast United States currently being pummeled by Hurricane Debby.) Having dependable advanced warning of such events allows for preparations to prevent disaster.
Fortunately, there is an agency of the federal government responsible for monitoring weather events and providing timely warnings which are critical for protecting and saving lives and property. The National Weather Service (NWS), a division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is responsible for managing the nation’s weather, water, and climate data and for providing forecasts and warnings of adverse weather events.
Project 2025, the plan by the Heritage Foundation to radically restructure our federal government, would drastically change that. Donald Cohen, founder and executive director of In the Public Interest, explains. “A running theme throughout the document is the idea that we should shrink the federal government and those remaining in it should carry out the political will of the President (even if that means contradicting accepted scientific knowledge, such as climate change).”
Project 2025 [Pg. 664] recommends that NOAA be “dismantled and many of its functions eliminated, sent to other agencies, privatized, or placed under the control of states and territories.” This would mean that whatever data and warnings the NWS now provides to the public (already paid for by the taxpayers) would have to come from some commercial service such as AccuWeather or the Weather Channel. It would keep NWS weather warnings off of social media so that the public would have to rely on warnings from private, paid-for services instead of direct contact with the NWS. Individuals and local authorities would no longer receive free Wireless Emergency Alerts (including Presidential and AMBER alerts) and NOAA Weather Radio services, which many currently rely on for safety and security.
Additionally, Project 2025 proposes to ensure that agency appointees agree with and support administration aims, in particular with regard to climate change. Employees of scientific agencies like NOAA would be required to adhere to the ideological and political views of the President. As an example of what that might look like, we need only recall the former president using the weather map altered by a Sharpie to back up his false assertions of where a hurricane would make landfall.
Proposals such as the above could lead to devastating consequences for the millions of Americans who depend on our government for critical weather and climate information. Project 2025 must be viewed for what it is: a conservative plan by the Republican Party to dismantle government programs vital to Americans. Voters must not allow the implementation of this agenda to destroy our country.
David B. Kyle, New Columbia
A Heartbeat Away
One of the most important decisions a presidential candidate makes is the choice of a running mate.
This decision is paramount since the potential future vice president is truly one heartbeat away once the inauguration takes place.
The GOP has floundered before with vice presidential picks. The late Senator John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin was ineffective and former President Trump’s choice is equally as disappointing. Senator JD Vance wasn’t in the senate long enough to distinguish himself and certainly does not seem ready to run the country. His breadth of political experience is lacking and his support of Donald Trump for his own political gain is troubling. No one criticized Trump more than Vance who likend him to Hitler!
On the other hand, VP Harris’s selection of Governor Tim Walz for presumptive Vice President is refreshing and welcomed! Governor Walz has executive experience, has been in the House of Representatives and is a veteran. He is a former educator and football coach. He has distinguished himself as the type of leader that works in a bipartisan fashion. Governor Walz enabled paid family leave, gun safety laws, universal school lunches, and support for civil and women’s reproductive rights.
As we approach November, we all must strongly consider what vision for America we would like to enjoy going forward. Is it a vision that includes policies that make people’s lives better or a vision that desires to move the country backwards?
VOTE and choose wisely!
Gail Titus, Newtown
For Women, It’s an Easy Choice Between Tim Walz and JD Vance
Who would you rather have as your Vice President?
Option A: Democrat Tim Walz, a man who signed legislation providing free tampons and other menstrual products in public schools.
Option B: Republican JD Vance who voted to allow surveillance of menstrual periods to make sure that a woman doesn’t obtain an abortion in another state if it’s not legal in her home state.
It’s an easy choice if you think that a woman should control her own body.
Abbey Carr, Centre County Democratic Committee Executive Director
What Does Trump Mean When He Says ‘You Won’t Have to Vote Anymore’?
At recent rallies, Donald Trump has been saying variations of the following: “Get out and vote this time, but after this you won’t have to vote anymore. In four years we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not gonna have to vote.”
What does he mean by this? That by 2028 they will have “fixed” the outcome of the election so that they are declared the winner even without having the votes?
This is the standard form of a democracy-to-fascism transformation. The Nazi Party legitimately won its way to political power in Germany in the early 1930’s via elections, but, once there, was able to stay in power by “fixing” (actually eliminating) elections so that future voting was not needed. Russia is similar today. They hold elections, but outcomes are predetermined so the result is the same whether or not people actually vote.
If the MAGA Republicans do have a scheme in mind to accomplish this, it would be better for them to keep it confidential until after this year’s election. But Trump is so undisciplined that he can’t resist bragging about this clever plan in advance. Of course, as usual, he doesn’t put any meat on the bones by explaining how this goal can be achieved. He likely did not concoct the plan himself, and probably does not understand the underlying strategy.
Hopefully giving voters advanced warning of the plan at this time can prevent its implementation by defeating Trump here in 2024.
Richard L. London, State College
