President Obama put out his vision Tuesday to circumvent Congress and implement some changes to reduce carbon emissions.
National papers reacted Wednesday.
Washington Post: "The major elements of the White House’s plan are still far better than settling for congressional inaction. Republicans in Congress, who were swift to criticize Mr. Obama on Tuesday, should offer him a better way to reduce emissions meaningfully while minimizing the economic effects. Otherwise, it’s time for the president to follow through."
The New York Times: "It is an impressive lineup that aims not only to reduce carbon emissions but to strengthen the nation’s defenses against rising seas, more intense storms, drought and other consequences of global warming. But, so far, it is only a list, involving many moving parts and government agencies, and seeing it through will require coordination and, above all, a continuing commitment from him."
Wall Street Journal: "Mr. Obama will impose these inherently political policy choices via unaccountable bureaucracies, with little or no debate. Mr. Obama might have at least announced his war on carbon before the election and let voters have a say. Instead he posed as the John the Baptist of fossil fuels in locales such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia—taking credit for the shale fracking boom he had nothing to do with and running ads attacking Mitt Romney as anticoal.
