I am not impressed by tokenism. I’d gotten a bulletin from North Carolina activists, with ten reasons they oppose Regan; I saw a similar list from California activists about Mary Nichols.

One criterion might be that a potential nominee should be endorsed by environmentalists (or the corresponding engaged community for other agencies) from the person’s own state. Haaland may be the first Native American to head Interior, but what really seems “histoic to me is that she’s apparently not a sellout; I’ve seen nothing but positive words from activists about her, and she participated in the Standing Rock encampment. Whereas Regan supported the ACP.

And what about the chip mills deforesting the southeast to send wood across the Atlantic to be burned in old coal-fired power plants, emitting more CO2 than the coal they replaced, but garnering climate credits because they’re supposedly climate neutral because the trees will grow back (if allowed).