I don't make a big deal out of Father's Day for my dad or myself. My dad knows we love him 365 days a year, but I still celebrate another opportunity to tell him so. I love calling him and hearing from our kids. I've always felt that being a good, loving, protective father is my #1 job in life. My "protective instinct" moved up a thousand notches (transforming from average nerd to medieval warrior in a modern nerd's skin) when our first child was born. I like to think that all fathers treat their "job" with this level of respect and dedication, but then again, I hear the mind-boggling horror stories. 😢
As my wife and I move through the "circle of life" and approach the grandparenting phase, my sights are set on a lot of longer-term factors that can affect my great-great grandchildren...and their children. It's already too late to assure they'll enjoy the same natural environments I've enjoyed, but I'm working at a number of levels to give them the best we can. This concern, tying today's celebration to my recent learning about environmental legislation [per my previous post] makes me wonder:
Why aren't there more good fathers in the Republican Party?
Admittedly, that is a screeching-tire segue, but here's where this question comes from: 1. Good fathers should feel a responsibility not just to their children, but to their children's children, and so on. 2. Republican members of Congress are clearly less concerned about the environment. (See proof below.) 3. If Republican fathers and other GOP constituents were concerned about the health and safety of their great grandchildren, they would have withdrawn their support for: a) Members of Congress who have repeatedly voted down legislative initiatives crafted to help improve our environment, largely due to the sizeable campaign donations from the fossil fuel industry. b) Donald Trump, when he withdrew from the Paris Accord, tried to get EPA regulations loosened even for industries that weren't asking for concessions, and made efforts to open up natural reserves for mining and oil drilling.
Need proof of point #2 above? When you look at our local Congressman's "Climate Playbook" (see previous blog post on Scott Peters) and just run the numbers on bill cosponsors, you'll find—as of June 13th—that there were 77 legislative proposals in the Playbook. Of the 934 cosponsors for the bills... • 700 (75%) were Democrats, and • 233 (25%) were Republican. (There was one Independent cosponsor on one bill.) This is simple, mathematical proof [albeit without the background detail] that Democrats in congress are THREE TIMES as interested as Republicans are in moving forward with legislation that can help the environment.
And now—as long as the evil turtle Mitch McConnell and the tantrum-throwing toddler Donald Trump are in power—we can count on almost nothing getting passed that will help make any progress. Instead, they'll vehemently deny that the skyrocketing CO₂ levels are anthropogenic, deny that the CO₂ levels are tied in any way to global warming, and sometimes even deny that there is any global warming.
So what can you do?
VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT.
VOTE BLUE IN 2020.
That's one of many suggestions I have for your personal "action plan" to help move in the right direction while we wait for governments and industries to do their part. Until we all start moving in the right direction, the forecast for 2050, and especially by the year 2100, are apocalyptic. There may be another mass extinction on the way, but we don't have to rush it!
www.EnvironmentalApocalypse.com
Comments