Tag Archives: 2020

Bernie Sanders’ ‘Green New Deal’ looks like a trillion bucks (OK, 16 trillion)

Washington Governor Jay Inslee vacated the role of “climate candidate” in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary when he dropped out of the race Wednesday night. By Thursday morning, it appeared Bernie Sanders was poised to fill it.

The Vermont senator unveiled a plan to spend more than $16 trillion in federal dollars on “a ten-year, nationwide mobilization centered around justice and equity” to forestall the climate crisis. He’s calling it — stop us if you’ve heard this one before — the “Green New Deal.”

Yep, Sanders told the New York Times that he’s putting “meat on the bones” of the resolution, introduced in February by New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, which called for a “10-year national mobilization” to essentially remake the U.S. into a clean-energy economy. The Ocasio-Cortez and Markey version of the Green New Deal (a.k.a. GND original flavor) is currently being constructed by the think tank New Consensus.

Sanders’ version calls for creating 20 million union jobs he says are necessary for averting climate disaster, phasing out fossil fuels by midcentury, providing $200 billion to the United Nations to aid developing countries in slashing emissions, and spearheading new projects in solar, wind, and geothermal energy. According to the senator’s campaign, the plan will pay for itself in 15 years, in part by levying massive taxes on the income of corporate polluters and increasing penalties for fossil-fuel company pollution. And Sanders said he would declare climate change a national emergency, a step that even Inslee was not ready to commit to. Last month, Sanders proposed a congressional resolution to do just that.

The language in Sanders’s plan indicates he’s ready to tussle with Big Oil: He says he would direct his Department of Justice to go after fossil fuel companies for both civil and criminal penalties. So far, cases winding through the state court systems have not been successful at holding the fossil fuel industry accountable.

“They have evaded taxes, desecrated tribal lands, exploited workers, and poisoned communities,” the proposal reads. “President Bernie Sanders will ensure that his Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission investigate these companies and bring suits — both criminal and civil — for any wrongdoing, just as the federal government did with the tobacco industry in the 1980s.”

The 77-year-old presidential-hopeful also plans to ensure a “fair” and “just transition” for fossil fuel workers. Under Sanders’ Green New Deal, the federal government would provide five years of unemployment insurance, a wage guarantee, housing assistance, and job training to “any displaced worker” who loses their job during the transition to a clean-energy economy.

Moreover, Sanders’ plan pitches a ban on hydraulic fracturing — a.k.a. fracking — and mountaintop coal mining. He also plans on establishing a $40 billion Climate Justice Resiliency Fund specifically to help communities of color prepare for climate impacts.

While the Green New Deal of Ocasio-Cortez and Markey calls for transitioning to 100-percent zero-emission energy generation and slashing emissions from transportation “as much as is technologically feasible” within 10 years, Sanders’ plan ups the ante a bit. He calls for eliminating all emissions from the transportation sector by 2030. And while the original resolution doesn’t exclude the use of nuclear power or developing technologies like carbon capture, Sanders’ proposal prohibits so-called “false solutions,” specifically naming nuclear, carbon sequestration, and geoengineering among them.

But while the Green New Deal (original) and its effect in shifting the conversation on climate in politics has been up to this point most closely identified with Ocasio-Cortez, today’s announcement could essentially transfer the concept to Sanders. So if at the next round of debates, fellow candidate and Senator Kamala Harris utters her support for a “Green New Deal”, as she has in the previous two, she’ll essentially be saying she supports Sanders’ plan. It’s his now — both its transformative allure, as well as its heavy price tag.

But at least, according to Sanders’ estimates, he can get the job done for less than 20 percent of what the Republicans say a Green New Deal will cost.

Continue reading: 

Bernie Sanders’ ‘Green New Deal’ looks like a trillion bucks (OK, 16 trillion)

Posted in Accent, alo, Casio, FF, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bernie Sanders’ ‘Green New Deal’ looks like a trillion bucks (OK, 16 trillion)

How to really judge whether 2020 candidates support the Green New Deal? Look at their climate plans.

From: 

How to really judge whether 2020 candidates support the Green New Deal? Look at their climate plans.

Posted in alo, Casio, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How to really judge whether 2020 candidates support the Green New Deal? Look at their climate plans.

What’s on Iowans’ minds going into the 2020 caucuses? Climate change

Visit link:

What’s on Iowans’ minds going into the 2020 caucuses? Climate change

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What’s on Iowans’ minds going into the 2020 caucuses? Climate change

Likely 2020 voters support parts of Green New Deal, despite reservations over the cost

Subscribe to The Beacon

This story was originally published by the HuffPost and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

A majority of likely 2020 voters supports key aspects of a Green New Deal even when faced with potential costs and downsides, but strict regulations to decarbonize the nation’s top polluters could trigger a backlash, according to a new poll from proponents of the policy.

The survey, released by the think tank Data for Progress and shared with HuffPost, found net support for a range of policies, including improving drinking water infrastructure, reforesting land, providing job training and insurance to displaced workers, and guaranteeing clean-energy jobs.

“At the core, the Green New Deal is about a moral imperative to transform our economy and improve people’s lives for the better,” said Greg Carlock, the researcher at Data for Progress and architect of the first Green New Deal blueprint published last September. “You can’t put a price on that, but even when you do, people still support it.”

But faced with a range of possible price tags, voters’ support varied, suggesting costs could factor high into the Green New Deal’s political viability. The results showed a majority of voters would likely oppose policies with stringent mandates — rules requiring all cars be electric by 2030 and every fossil fuel power plant close by 2035.

To test the support, Data for Progress commissioned the Democratic pollster Civis Analytics to survey 3,496 likely voters between January 4 – 26 on 11 policies expected to be included a Green New Deal. The poll tested four different cost scenarios on each question, randomly alternating between zero, low, medium, and high prices to test how the cost of a policy weighed on one-quarter of respondents’ opinions.

The green jobs guarantee, considered by Green New Deal proponents to be the heart of the suite of policies, proved one of the tricker components. In a lengthy prompt, the survey asked respondents if they support or oppose a policy that Democrats promised would “guarantee an environmentally friendly job to every American adult, with the government providing jobs for people who can’t find employment in the private sector.”

The question described the job as a position that would pay “at least $15 an hour, included healthcare benefits, and collective bargaining rights.” The surveyors added that Republicans warned the policy “would increase the national debt, endanger the long term health of our economy, and this policy will end up paying people who can’t contribute in the job market to perform pointless busy work.”

Thirty-nine percent supported the green jobs guarantee, 33 percent opposed, and 27 didn’t know. Without a price, voters were 9 percentage points likelier to support than oppose the policy. At a low of $100 billion, support hit 2 percentage points. Voters were about evenly divided on policies costing $500 billion or $1 trillion.

Mandates requiring the country to generate 100 percent of its electricity from renewables by 2050 enjoyed sweeping support. The question noted that Democrats believed such a policy would “kickstart the renewable energy sector, creating jobs for many Americans and ensuring that America leads the world in green technology,” while Republicans said, “this would take away freedom from American consumers, put people out of work, and raise prices for everything from transportation to consumer goods.”

Thirty-eight percent supported the proposal, 33 percent opposed and 30 percent didn’t know. Without a price, voters backed the policy by 7 percentage points. At a low of $25 billion, that figure fell to 2 percentage points. Support held steady at 1 percentage point for both a medium cost of $37.5 billion and a high of $50 billion. Age impacted support at the unstated price level. Voters aged 18 to 34 supported the policy by 15 percentage points, while those 65 and older opposed the policy by 11 percentage points.

Policies improving drinking water infrastructure proved to be the most popular. The survey outlined a proposal to improve infrastructure “and replace lead pipes,” considering that Republicans “say that our drinking infrastructure is in good shape already, and this represents a wasteful use of resources that will burden our children with debt.”

Half of the respondents supported the proposal, 21 percent opposed, and 29 percent didn’t know. At no stated price, voters supported the proposal by 36 percentage points. Faced with a low cost of $25 billion, support sank to 27 percentage points. At a medium cost of $37.5 billion, the percentage dropped to 23. At a high of $50 billion, it fell to 22 percentage points.

The least popular policy was one “proposing requiring that all new cars sold be electric by 2030.” The question said, “Democrats say this would help stop climate change, save thousands of lives by reducing pollution, and make the U.S. the definitive leader in the electric car industry.”

Republicans say this would take away freedom from American consumers, put people making cars out of work, and make new cars unaffordable for the average American.

Just 26 percent supported the policy, with 44 percent opposed, and 33 percent unsure. Without even seeing a price, voters opposed the electric car mandate by 15 percentage points.

The second-least popular was a proposal “requiring that all fossil fuel plants (coal, natural gas, and oil) cease operating by 2035” in an effort to “help stop climate change” that Republicans say “would put many Americans out of work, and could lead to an energy crisis as energy prices soar.”

Voters opposed the measure by 3 percentage points, again without seeing a price.

Always free, always fresh.

Ask your climate scientist if Grist is right for you. See our privacy policy

The findings come just weeks before the Senate is expected to hold a vote on the Green New Deal resolution Senator Ed Markey (a Democrat from Massachussetts) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (a Democrat from New York) released last week. The measure, essentially a political statement outlining the scope of what’s needed to prepare the U.S. for a rapidly warming climate, staked out an ambitious list of policies to protect vulnerable communities already suffering from pollution.

In what Green New Deal supporters called a cynical ploy to halt their movement’s growing momentum, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (a Republican from Kentucky), a veteran climate change denier who’s taken millions from the fossil fuel industry, vowed this week to hold a vote, forcing swing-state senators to take positions on a policy Republicans are aggressively working to vilify.

The vast majority of Americans understand climate change is happening and human-caused emissions are the primary cause. In December, 81 percent of registered voters supported the goals of the Green New Deal, including 64 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of conservative Republicans, according to a poll from Yale and George Mason universities. But the pollsters warned that the overwhelming bipartisan support could erode as the Green New Deal became more closely associated with individual politicians.

The Sunrise Movement, the grassroots climate advocacy group whose thousands of volunteers helped propel the Green New Deal into the national stage in November with a series of protests against top Democrats, said Wednesday it would ramp up actions confronting both Democrats and swing-state Republicans, urging them to support the policy. Groups like Justice Democrats, the left-wing organization that helped run Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign, and Data for Progress vowed to aid efforts to primary any Democrats who oppose the Green New Deal.

“The Green New Deal won’t hurt Democrats politically,” said Sean McElwee, the co-founder of Data for Progress. “But failing to take aggressive action on climate change could demoralize the millennial base who demand immediate action on climate change.”

See the article here:

Likely 2020 voters support parts of Green New Deal, despite reservations over the cost

Posted in Accent, alo, Anchor, Casio, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Landmark, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Likely 2020 voters support parts of Green New Deal, despite reservations over the cost