Politics

278 readers

112 users here now

For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.

Rule 1: Posts have the following requirements:
▪️ Post articles about the US only

▪️ Title must match the article headline

▪️ Recent (Past 30 Days)

▪️ No Screenshots/links to other social media sites or link shorteners

Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. One or two small paragraphs are okay.

Rule 3: Articles based on opinion (unless clearly marked and from a serious publication), misinformation or propaganda will be removed.

Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.

Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

USAfacts.org

The Alt-Right Playbook

Media owners, CEOs and/or board members

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Supreme Court allows EPA emissions rule to stand while litigation continues (www.scotusblog.com)

submitted 8 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

1 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Supreme Court on Wednesday left in place a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in May to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by power plants. In a brief order, the justices turned down a request from states, energy companies, and other industry groups to put the rule on hold while their challenge in a federal appeals court moves forward.

Defending the rule, the EPA says that it would lead to significant reductions in carbon pollution over the next two decades – “equivalent to preventing the annual emissions of 328 million gasoline cars.” And that in turn, the EPA argues, could provide nearly $400 billion in benefits to the climate and public health.

top 1 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 hours ago

I wonder who paid for that.