• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report: Climate Provision Would Allow Global Warming 'Victims' to Sue

GottaHurt

GottaHurt

Sexual Deviant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
2,899
Reaction score
790
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The Times reported that Democratic Reps. Henry Waxman of California and Edward Markey of Massachusetts added it into a bill they authored.

The provision, which was just released, reportedly would set grounds for plaintiffs who has "suffered" or expect to suffer "harm" attributable at least in part to government inaction. The provision defines "harm" as "any effect of air pollution (including climate change)," according to the Times. Plaintiffs could seek up to $75,000 in damages a year from the government, with $1.5 million being the maximum total payout.
Click to expand...

The stupidity is never ending. With all the challenges our country is facing, with our court system overburdened enough as is, we now have Waxman & Company taking stupidity to a whole new level.

Report: Climate Provision Would Allow Global Warming 'Victims' to Sue - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com
 
MrVicchio said:
What is the most prolific profession to be lawmaker?

Lawyer. shocked anyone.
Click to expand...

Rat laywers helping out their rat lawyer friends with this man made global warming fairy tale scam.It amuses me when the man made global warming fairy tale believers can sit there and pretend that this is not a scam.
 
I'm just wondering if this is just a shoe horn to pass cap and trade legislation.

The argument being if there were cap and trade in place, it would reduce emissions to an acceptable level in which this type of legislation wouldn't be needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom