Global Warming and the Republican Majority in Congress.

http://www.alternet.org/activism/what-midterms-mean-climate-movement

The 2014 midterm elections weren’t all bad news for the climate movement. There are certainly a few things to be happy about: Denton, the Texas city where fracking was practically invented, passed an unprecedented ban  barring the practice within city limits. In Richmond, Calif., the home of one of the country’s largest oil refineries, progressive candidates for local office won despite Chevron pouring some $3 million into the election. In other progressive arenas, voters moved to  legalize marijuana in Alaska, Oregon and the nation’s capital, and pass  minimum wage hikes in a number of other cities and states. These are victories that can and should be celebrated.
All that said, there needs to be some real talk about what the results of Tuesday’s elections mean for climate organizers, especially in light of last week’s Intergovernmental Panel  on Climate Change report, which said that emissions need to fall  42 to 71 percent below 2010 levels in order to prevent “severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts for people and ecosystems.” The threat that Tuesday’s election results pose to the movement is even more bleak than Congressional  gridlock, which — unfortunately — is nothing new in Washington. The 2013-2014, or 113th, Congress is on track to be  history’s least productive: just 185 bills became law this session. In other words, it’s not as if the midterms wiped some miracle climate legislation off the table.