Top Dem: Climate Change Not a More Immediate Threat Than Terrorism - East Idaho News
Politics

Top Dem: Climate Change Not a More Immediate Threat Than Terrorism

  Published at

Getty 021515 Schiff?  SQUARESPACE CACHEVERSION=1424033473232Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) — The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee disputed Sunday President Obama’s suggestion last week that climate change poses as serious a threat to society as terrorism.

Appearing on ABC’s This Week, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl he disagreed with the president’s assessment on climate change.

“I wouldn’t agree that it’s the more immediate threat,” Schiff said. “It’s certainly a threat to our planet and it’s one we have to deal with and we don’t know where the tipping point is. But it’s such a very different problem, I’m not sure I’d put them in the same sentence.”

In an interview with Vox posted last week, the president was asked if the media overhypes the dangers of terrorism relative to longer-term issues such as climate change and epidemic diseases.

“Absolutely,” President Obama replied. “And I don’t blame the media for that. What’s the famous saying about local newscasts, right? If it bleeds, it leads, right? You show crime stories and you show fires, because that’s what folks watch, and it’s all about ratings. And, you know, the problems of terrorism and dysfunction and chaos, along with plane crashes and a few other things, that’s the equivalent when it comes to covering international affairs. … And climate change is one that is happening at such a broad scale and at such a complex system, it’s a hard story for the media to tell on a day-to-day basis.”

When Karl asked White House press secretary Josh Earnest Tuesday to clarify the president’s comments to Vox, Earnest said that more people are “directly affected” by issues like climate change than terrorism.

“The point that the president is making is that when you’re talking about the direct daily impact of these kind of challenges on the daily lives of Americans, particularly Americans living in this country, that that direct impact is more — that more people are directly affected by those things than by terrorism,” Earnest said.

On the new Authorization for the Use of Military Force that Obama sent Congress Wednesday, Schiff said it is “very important” that Congress doesn’t “write another black check” to the White House, referring back to the 2001 authorization that governed the war on terrorism after the September 11 attacks.

“I think it’s very important that we find a way to get to yes on an authorization. But I also think it’s very important that we not write another blank check,” Schiff said. “We did that 14 years ago with the 2001 authorization. And that authorization continues in force on the president’s proposal.”

“That’s very worrying to a lot of Democrats, because it means that when the new one expires, the next president can simply rely on this old authorization and say that gives me the authority to go after whoever I want, wherever I want in any way I want,” Schiff added.

The president’s proposal would restrict any campaign against ISIS to three years, but it includes no geographic limits for any U.S. campaign against the terrorist organization, which has reach across the Middle East and Africa.

While Schiff and other Democrats say they believe the proposal would cede too much power to the president, Iraq war veteran Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Illinois, said the proposed AUMF “ties the president’s hands.”

“What his draft resolution would do is say we need to destroy ISIS to a point unless it takes enduring offensive operations, whatever that means, then in which case we just don’t have the authority to do it,” Kinzinger said on This Week.


World News Videos | ABC World News



Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

SUBMIT A CORRECTION