The Supreme Court gave illegal immigration opponents and the Bush administration a key victory today when it rejected a case brought by environmental groups challenging the construction of a section of the new border fence with Mexico. The case challenged the government's right to waive environmental requirements in the construction of a two-mile stretch of the fence near Naco, Arizona. Environmental groups said that the fence jeopardized endangered species that cross the border in the area to mate.

Last year, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff utilized his power to waive the regulations, under an authorization in the Real ID Act of 2005, to allow the construction of the fence to continue on its rapid pace. About 331 miles of fencing have been constructed in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, including the disputed two-mile section. Chertoff has used the waiver authority a total of three times, including once to waive seven separate federal regulations for a section of the fence near San Diego, CA. The Department of Homeland Security issued a statement praising the decision.

"As fence construction proceeds, the department will continue to be a good steward of the environment, and consult with appropriate state, local, and tribal officials."

Bill Clinton took a pass on an opportunity to MoveOn and endorse Senator Obama on Sunday, opting instead to shake hands, kiss babies, and effusively praise Senator Obama's energy and environmental policies as, meh, better than the Republicans' anyway.

It was President Clinton's first public appearance since his wife's suspension of her campaign. According to Reuters, when asked whether he would soon be endorsing Senator Obama, Clinton "smiled and shook hands with spectators without acknowledging he heard the question."

Later on at the same event, President Clinton addressed Senator Obama's carbon emissions plan. "Because I believe so strongly in this," he said, "I favor Senator Obama's position, which is to go to 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gasses over Senator McCain's position, which is to go to 70 percent. But that's light years ahead of where Republicans have been." That statement roughly translates to "Obama and McCain are both light years ahead of Bush, but Obama wins slightly ... I guess."

As Hot Air notes, President Clinton seemed to swear off the campaign trail in a statement earlier this month, saying "I want to say also, that this may be the last day I'm ever involved in a campaign of this kind," at a town hall event June 2. If this latest event is at all diagnostic, I'd say he's keeping to that plan.

the Next Right is on top of the last few days hoorah around Republican and conservative circles. The intense focus on oil, offshore drilling, etc. has moved beyond the usual circles into Evangelical territory:

he American Family Association sent out an alert to its massive list and got 400,000 letters sent to Congress for more oil drilling. Why is this important? In presentations, I often cite the AFA's monster list as the biggest on the Right. And in my years on their list, I've never seen them focus on anything other than social issues. Their focus on oil is a big, big deal.

It's pretty much the only topic that anyone on the right is talking about, for three straight days. Talk about on message. Today, The Next Right speculates as to whether, in the face of the $4 a gallon gas and crashing support for bans on drilling, the Democratic party will abandon environmental concerns in the same way they have essentially abandoned gun control. This is a good comparison, but it's early yet to see if it will work out the same:

The conventional punditry on McCain's call to end the ban on offshore oil exploration has focused on whether President Bush's suppport for the idea will hurt McCain in the fall. But that could change, and soon, if what's happened in just the past few days develops into a real trend:

• Sen. Jim Webb announced he now supports exploration off the coast of Virginia.
• Ex-Gov. Mark Warner also supports opening up the Virginia coastline to possible drilling.
• Meanwhile, the latest Gallup survey shows Democrats are split on offshore drilling, with 39% in support while 59% still oppose.

Better yet, it's an issue where independents side with the GOP, although the margins are not so wide (80% in favor vs. 56%). Overall, Americans favor opening up U.S. coastal waters by a 57% to 41%.

Now, what does this issue remind you of? How about gun control in the late 1990s?

And then goes on to highlight this Chris Bowers quote from MyDD, a traditional liberal blog.

The politics have changed, and I don't see the principle that guides Democrats to be unequivocally against offshore drilling for oil at this point. We are stuck on oil for a long time. Congressional Dems should adopt the position, include some safeguards, and alongside billions in funding for finding alternative fuel solutions, make it part of a long-term solution.

He sees that the Democrats cannot sustain opposition to drilling in the face of overwhelming popular support without terrible consequences at the polls. It really is just common sense and the need to win and pick your battles.

I just listened to President Bush renew his call to allow drilling in the country's Outer Continental Shelf and to let states help to decide where to allow drilling. Oh, and he also wants to go ahead and open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, too. And then I got angry.

The Shelf is defined as "all submerged lands lying seaward of state coastal waters (3 miles offshore) which are under U.S. jurisdiction." That includes the frigid Alaskan waters, the coral reefs of the Florida Keys, Maine's rocky coasts and other shorelines in between where, the Sierra Club points out, thousands of plant and animal species thrive. Bush's reasoning is that $4+ per gallon gas at the pump is just cause to mutilate our shorelines and decimate the surrounding environments and ecosystems with our drills. It reportedly could take up to 10 years to even get that oil out.

This same week, Congress once again failed again to pass a bill extending tax credits that would continue to fuel the growth of the solar and wind industries. The incentives are due to expire at the end of the year. Because the industries are capital intensive to get off the ground, tax credits are required to help get them up and running - and to encourage residents to lean green. Apparently our lawmakers are fighting over who is going to pay for those incentives.

The San Francisco Chronicle notes that there are currently 22 major solar power plants in the planning phase in the U.S., many of them in Southern California. But all those deals were signed based on the assumption Congress would extend the solar energy tax incentives.

Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell has the audacity to hope:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell dropped by our offices in New York this week. Republicans face potential electoral disaster this fall, but he says a few issues could turn out to be lifesavers. Case in point: Gas prices, at more than $4 per gallon for the first time in history. Mr. McConnell notes that a new poll shows Americans now favor drilling for oil in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge 57% to 41%. That's up from a nearly even split before consumers were getting socked at the pump. Asks Mr. McConnell: "At what point does the hammerlock the Sierra Club has on the Democrats come off? Is it $5? Is it $6?"

The hammerlock comes off at $4 as the poll shows, but the effort is complicated by a few things. One is that there are many other issues on the table which cut against Republicans. The other big complication is that John McCain is still in "maverick" mode and has not figured out that gas prices and drilling are winning issues for the GOP.

So the key question is not what the Democrats will do, they are locked in between working class voters on one end and upper class yuppies with a penchant for green living on the other end. Who will win? The Democrats hope to never have to find out. So they blame the oil companies and hope no one asks them serious questions.

No, the real interesting question is at what point does it behoove John McCain to put together a serious plan to address energy issues that has a credible chance at lowering energy costs? $5, $6? Whatever it is, we haven't hit it yet.

Environmentalists in Ohio are putting heat on Sherrod Brown:

What's interesting about this is that the Ohio economy has taken two body blows in just the last week due primarily to high fuel prices.

First DHL decided to give up and outsource their overnight delivery to UPS, which kills about 6,000 jobs in Wilmington, a small community in a rural part of southwest Ohio. And just a few days ago, GM decided to close a truck plant in Dayton. The latter was partially offset by more small cars in Lordstown, but the problem for Sherrod remains.

And that's not even getting into the politics around coal, a major player in Ohio energy production, and discussed in this article.

In 2006, Sherrod barnstormed the state decryinig the state of Ohio's manufacturing industry and blaming all the ills on free trade and evil corporations. Well we have here two concrete examples of a problem for Ohio industry; high fuel prices, and Sherrod hasn't said boo about DHL or GM, and now he is on the verge of signing legislation that will increase energy costs for everyone? That's not what Ohio workers thought they were getting with Senator Brown.

Health and environmental groups are suing the Environmental Protection Agency for its (meaning, the Bush administration's) refusal to adopt stronger ozone standards.

The public interest law firm Earthjustice filed the intent to sue with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on behalf of the American Lung Association, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Environmental Defense Fund, National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), and Appalachian Mountain Club. The groups say the EPA standards adopted in March for ozone pollution - "smog" - are too weak and put public health and the environment at greater risk. The elderly, kids and those with respiratory ailments are particularly vulnerable, they argue.

The agency in March set a nationwide limit on the amount of ozone permitted in the atmosphere at 75 parts per billion. The EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee had said 60 and 70 parts per billion of ozone would be acceptable. Factories, utilities and other business groups wanted the level to stay at 84 parts per billion.

"EPA officials ignored the advice of their own scientists when they chose these deficient standards, but they can't ignore the law," said Earthjustice attorney David Baron. "The Clean Air Act requires EPA to adopt standards strong enough to protect our lungs and our environment. We're fighting to make sure that happens. Stronger standards could save thousands of lives, by some estimates."

"The president personally engaged in an unprecedented level of intervention and interference," NRDC's John Walke told CongressDaily, which reports that the National Association of Manufacturers and other industry groups will counter that EPA issued a standard that is too costly to businesses, and that the agency did not objectively consider the science in deciding to replace a less-stringent requirement.

This latest from Obama reminds me of something:

Pitching his message to Oregon's environmentally-conscious voters, Obama called on the United States to "lead by example" on global warming, and develop new technologies at home which could be exported to developing countries.

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.

"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added.

Which reminded me of this little speech from over thirty years ago.

Wired's Brandon Keim reports that a new poll from the Pew Research Center shows a sharp drop in the number of Americans who believe the Earth is warming. Since a January poll, the percentage of those who accept global warming dropped from 77 percent to 71 percent.

Keim writes, "Seeing as how 2007 was the second-warmest year on record, and the popular press finally took climate change seriously, I'm not sure how attitudes shifted in this manner."

Indeed the poll comes at a time when evidence continues to pile up that climate change is real. USA Today reports that a new study shows "rapid glacier melts in North America, South America and Europe; trees and plants sprouting leaves much earlier in the spring in Europe, Asia and North America; permafrost melting in Asia; and changes in bird migration patterns across Europe, North America and Australia, all in response to rising global temperatures."

Oddly, the numbers reflect a growing partisan divide at a time when the Republican nominee, John McCain, is campaigning on the issue. The sharpest drop is among Republicans, with just 49 percent, down from 62 percent in January. Speaking yesterday at a Portland, Oregon, wind turbine manufacturer, McCain signaled his determination to lead the world in a campaign against global warming. "I will not permit eight long years to pass without serious action on serious challenges. I will not accept the same dead-end of failed diplomacy that claimed Kyoto. The United States will lead and will lead with a different approach - an approach that speaks to the interests and obligations of every nation," he said.

Seattle Post Intelligencer cartoonist David Horsey posted a cartoon here that illustrates the problems McCain may have with his base if he continues to push this issue.

John McCain today is launching a climate change video entitled, "A Better Way." Although it does little by way of letting viewers know what McCain would do to fix the problem, it does refer to how "one extreme" thinks "high taxes, and crippling regulation" is the solution, while another "denies the problem even exists."

"I believe climate change is real," a casually-dressed McCain on a mountain says. "It's not just a greenhouse gas issue, it's a national security issue."

The ad comes as McCain travels to the Pacific Northwest to talk about the generally oft-neglected topic. In Portland today, he will deliver what his campaign is calling "a major speech" outlining his plans to combat the threat of global climate change and "re-establish America's environmental leadership in the world."

He's going to propose a domestic cap-and-trade system his campaign says will mobilize market forces to develop and commercialize alternatives to carbon-based fuels. Tomorrow, he will participate in a discussion in Seattle with environmentalists, conservationists and the business community on how to combat climate change.



After the jump, the new pro-Hillary video featuring the White House-scorned duo of Joe and Valerie Plame Wilson.