GordonGekko
Footballguy
Direct Headline: The Democrats Really Are That Dense About Climate Change
The party doesn’t even seem to realize that it’s blowing a once-in-a-decade chance to pass meaningful climate legislation....Missing was any sense that this legislation is a make-or-break moment for the broader Democratic caucus. Gone was any suggestion that if Democrats fail to pass a bill this term, then America’s climate commitment under the Paris Agreement will be out of reach, and worse heat waves, larger wildfires, and damaging famines across the country and around the world within the next decade and a half will be all but assured....
Pelosi did not seem to understand, really, why Congress needed to pass a climate law this session. (She seemed to blame the fossil-fuel industry for the current Congress’s inaction.) ... Climate action was “for the children” in the 1990s. “We’re not doing this for the children,” Kate Larsen, an energy analyst at the Rhodium Group, told me after the event. “We’re doing this for us!” Heat waves hot enough to cook human flesh are already happening this month; they will become more common over the coming decades, striking multiple times a year. Unbearable droughts, sea-level rise so high as to break levees, and unpredictable famines will characterize life. Most of the world’s coral reefs, including the Great Barrier Reef, will undergo bleaching every few years, meaning the water will be so hot that the coral will eject their symbiotic microorganisms into the water, starving themselves in the process....
The speech seemed to punctuate the collapse of climate politics over the past year. During the campaign, Biden described climate change as one of the country’s four major overlapping crises. Yet his administration seems to be sleepwalking toward inaction.... Five months ago, Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat of West Virginia, killed Biden’s Build Back Better bill after the White House repeatedly ignored his attempts to pare it down. Since then, Democrats have been stuck in limbo, with Manchin laying out some of his terms for a replacement bill, and Democrats neglecting to put together a new bill reflecting those terms. It now seems likely that Democrats will lose control of Congress with only a bipartisan infrastructure bill to show for their trouble....
...At the same time, the Biden administration could soon lose its ability to regulate climate change at all. The Supreme Court could restrict the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases this term. It could also curtail Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that gives executive agencies more freedom to operate when the underlying law is unclear. In the past, both concepts have been central to Democratic climate-rule making. Both could be gone by 2023...What all of this means is that, the next time a climate-skeptical president takes office, advocates will have fewer tools to constrain their behavior than last time. And they will have no future to point to: If Democrats couldn’t pass a climate bill in 2009 or 2022, why should anyone have any hope that they’ll try to do it again, or be able to?
By Robinson Meyer May 11, 2022
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/05/nancy-pelosi-democrats-climate-change-bill/629822/
Direct Headline: House Democrats urge Biden to pass climate change portion of Build Back Better
House Democrats have reupped calls for President Joe Biden to move ahead with the $555 billion in climate change investments already passed by the House as part of the Build Back Better Act....The package has stalled for more than a month in the Senate after Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., sank the bill by opposing it in December....The climate portion of the legislation represents the largest-ever federal investment in clean energy....The climate investments in Build Back Better largely come through tax incentives for low-emissions energy sources....The bill’s biggest spending components include 10-year tax credits to expand and accelerate investments in renewable power, including wind, solar and nuclear. It has a proposal to provide an electric vehicle tax credit of up to $12,500 for vehicles made at a unionized factory in the U.S. It would invest in new research for carbon capture technology and create a Civilian Climate Corps to spur job growth and conserve public lands, among other things....
...Manchin, who comes from the coal-rich state of West Virginia and profits from a coal consulting business he founded, has indicated he is open to passing standalone climate provisions outside of the BBB legislation, including production tax credits for the solar and wind sectors....Manchin previously rejected the bill’s proposed clean electricity program. The initial key component of the president’s framework would have incentivized energy companies to shift away from fossil fuels to clean energy and penalized companies that did not....Manchin also opposed a proposed fee on emissions of methane, a potent planet-warming gas, as well as a provision that would provide tax credits to some electric vehicle consumers....
Emma Newburger, Feb 1 2022 5:15 PM EST
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/01/democrats-urge-biden-to-pass-climate-change-part-of-build-back-better.html
Direct Headline: Climate change: Democratic alarmism leads to failing policies
Climate change needs to be addressed but the Democrats' plan is alarmist and not going to save the planet. We need to weigh costs and benefits of climate action....Over the past few decades, climate change has been cast in ever more apocalyptic terms. A new global survey shows that almost half the world’s population and about 4 of 10 Americans believe global warming will likely lead to the extinction of the human race.... However, such scare scenarios are ideal for politicians; they can promise to save the world, and they can leave the substantial bill to future election cycles....
....Yes, climate change is a real challenge that we need to tackle smartly. But suggesting it is an “existential threat” to human existence, as Joe Biden frequently claims, causes us to panic and make poor decisions. Instead, we need to weigh costs and benefits of climate action....This doesn’t mean there aren’t real benefits to cutting emissions....the Democratic plan contains no cost estimates, despite its intention to fundamentally restructure the growth engine of the U.S. Only one nation — New Zealand — has been bold enough to request an independent cost estimate of cutting emissions to zero by 2050. The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research found that the optimistic cost would reduce GDP by a whopping 16% each year by 2050. Translated to the projected U.S. GDP in 2050, this would imply a cost of at least $5 trillion in today’s money. Not just once, but every year. That is more than the entire pre-Covid-19 annual federal spending of $4.5 trillion....
Needless to say, spending 16% or more to avoid part of a 2% problem is a bad deal. But Democrats are not alone. Many countries have made spectacular promises to cut emissions and failed....That is why Democrats — and all of us — should focus more on solutions that will actually be effective and realistic. Currently, cutting emissions is costly and involves subsidizing inefficient solar, wind, and electric cars. Rich countries can afford a little, though none can afford to dramatically switch.... Proposing unrealistic and extremely expensive policies is unhelpful. The Democrats are correct to emphasize we need climate policies, but the policies must be smart....
Bjorn Lomborg 7/23/20
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/23/climate-change-overreaction-democrats-need-realistic-solutions-column/5434178002/
Direct Headline: From college to climate, Democrats are sealing their doom by selling out young voters | Will Bunch
....But just nine months into the 46th presidency, Biden is struggling to earn even that “C+” on his first report card from America’s young voters. The last week of headlines — that free community college is completely dropped from the Democrats’ economic plan ....along with the Godot-like wait for major action on student debt — has shaken many teen and 20-something voters who hoped for more.....“It’s insulting that we’re not being given a seat at the table after helping deliver Biden his victory in November....And it’s absolutely devastating, honestly, that our future is being neglected to the extent that it is ... Young people are going to bear the burden of these policy blunders....”
...But what should the United States expect next from young people who’ve seen such little substantial change ....“It’s like a knife stabbed you in the back,”....While college voters, in particular, strongly supported left-wing Sens. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren in early Democratic primaries, they overcame any qualms about Biden’s past record to rally behind him....Researchers at Tufts University found 18-29-year-old turnout had increased substantially — from about 42% to 44% in 2016, when youth apathy was one key to Trump’s victory, to a 52% to 56% range last year. Those young voters went for Biden, 61% to 36%, and the Tufts team found their votes put the Democrat over the top in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Arizona.
Simply put, under-30 voters handed Biden the Electoral College......
.....“College students are issue voters,” ....find young voters are less wedded to party ID and more focused toward action on issues like climate or gun safety, while older voters are more drawn toward “electability,” the factor that drove Biden’s 2020 march to the Democratic nomination.....
Will Bunch Oct 21, 2021
https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/biden-democrats-young-voters-community-college-climate-20211021.html
Direct Headline: How Does 'Boss' AOC Plan To Pay For Her $93 Trillion Green New Deal?
Environmentalism: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has declared herself "boss" of the "Green New Deal." Maybe she can explain were the money will come from to pay its $93 trillion cost. Because taxing the rich won't even scratch the surface.....Ocasio-Cortez's response: "Some people are like, 'Oh, it's unrealistic, oh it's fake, oh it doesn't address this little minute thing. And I'm like, 'You try! You do it.' 'Cause you're not. 'Cause you're not. So, until you do it, I'm the boss. How 'bout that?"
....A new analysis from the American Action Forum finds that the Green New Deal, as laid out by New York Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, would cost up to $93 trillion in the first ten years.
Remember, the GND isn't just about converting the entire U.S. energy supply to renewable energy in a decade and establishing a "zero emissions transportation system."...The plan also includes things like "guaranteed" federal jobs, "universal health care," and "food security."....Despite the GND's name, it's the proposals that have nothing to do with climate change that cost the most. The price tag for a federal guaranteed jobs program could run as much as $44.6 trillion over the next decade. The "universal health care" plan? $36 trillion.....
....All told, the cost of the "green" part of the Green New Deal would run from $8.3 trillion to $12.3 trillion over the next 10 years, according to the AAF report. The rest of it would cost an additional $42.8 trillion to $80.6 trillion....Looked at another way, economists expect the entire U.S. gross domestic product over the next decade to total $266 trillion.....What's most shocking about the Green New Deal is that so many leading Democrats, many of whom very much hope one day to be president, are blindly embracing it....
Investors 01:00 AM ET 02/26/2019
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/green-new-deal-93-trillion-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/
************
https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/771204-climate-change-thread-un-report-we-need-to-take-action/?do=findComment&comment=24077538
timschochet 158.8k Posted 06/22/22 8:36 AM
All I’m saying is that if climate change is for you the overriding issue of our time (as it is for me) then there’s no way you can support anyone but the Democrats as imperfect as they’ve been. The response “well the Democrats don’t have any solutions either” doesn’t fly because in the past 30 years (ever since this issue began to arise as an impending crisis) 100% of all proposals and actions and ideas to combat it have been from Democrats. 100%!! The only thing Republicans have done during that time is either deny it, downplay it, or simply oppose every proposal because it might hurt the economy (as they’re doing right now.) There is no way to avoid the verdict that if you support Republicans, you are supporting doing nothing about climate change.
***********
I started this top level thread to address the comments by @timschochet that the only hope for positive long term climate change will come from blindly voting for the Democratic Party.
I disagree.
1) Joe Biden and the Biden Administration ( Let's call it Susan Rice And The Jackie Aprile Jr Collective informally....) had an opportunity to untether their climate change proposals out of Build Back Better to appeal to Joe Manchin to vote their way. But the Democratic Party did what it always does - Shove overly complex fat political pork, big donor corporate interests and quid pro quo for the wealthy elite that keep them in office, by the truckload into any bill.
Team Blue had the sitting POTUS and a majority in Congress. If they can't cut a deal or modify a deal or negotiate with a lone holdout, that's on them, not the GOP.
Would it have killed the Democratic Party to aim for something that dealt more with practical climate policy in stages and less about keeping the corporate donor overlords happy and full of fat political pork? Would it have killed Team Blue to offer something smaller and "non porky" that would generate actual bipartisan support to work around Manchin's holdout?
2) WikiLeaks made it clear that Hillary Clinton conspired with then DNC HQ head Debbie Wasserman Schultz to steal the 2016 DNC ticket from Bernie Sanders. While I personally see Sanders as complete unhinged socialist empty suit, I won't deny he was the closest that Team Blue had come to getting a true "climate concerned/climate as the first priority" POTUS in office. Except he was shafted by his own Party apparatus.
If the Democratic Party and the DNC cared so much about climate change, how about not sticking a knife in the back of Bernie Sanders? That's on them, not the GOP.
3) During the Obama Administration, "Cool Guy President" had his chance with the necessary filibuster proof majority in Congress to push effective and long term positive climate change legislation. Did he make the most of that opportunity? He did not. In fact, Obama oversaw record breaking oil drilling and gas extraction and enabling Big Oil while courting other Big Corporate interests. Then he demanded everyone thank him for it.
If you miss your effective window when you have, again, the sitting POTUS and a majority in Congress, that's on you, not the GOP.
4) AOC, once Sanders kept getting knifed by his own Party, became the new standard bearer for Progressives with fighting for climate change. What did she do? She did what Democrats always do, again, fill the proposal with massive political pork. The rough estimates for Green New Deal was around a WTF inducing 93 trillion. As Bjorn Lomberg of USA Today points out - You can't just have band aid virtue signaling policy being pushed forward, it needs to be smart functional measured policy that has a practical pathway for success. AOC never answers the hard question. Who is going to pay that? How could America pay for that? AOC denounced all criticism, shouting "I'm the boss!"
If Team Blue enables and pushes forward someone like AOC, who single-handedly crushes the future prospects of anyone taking some version of Green New Deal seriously, then that's on the Democratic Party and the Progressives and AOC, not the GOP.
5) Biden is only in office, in part, because younger voters made a difference for him in key battleground areas. What does he do? Renege on each and every promise he made to them. If you want your public policy to take hold and survive legal scrutiny, you need majorities. You need to win POTUS, take a major share of the seats in Congress and have your side of the aisle have an advantage in numbers in SCOTUS. How do you do that? You win a crap load of elections. Just keep winning and keep getting your people and loyalists into office, and you'll have the numbers to push the policy you want and have it be upheld.
How you don't win those elections is make promises and outright lie to people and not deliver on what you assured them would happen to make their lives better. You can't complain about policy you want, like climate change, not becoming reality if you don't rack up lots of those needed wins. You need to enrich the the day to day lives of every day working class citizens to achieve that. If you help them, they will actually want to come out and vote for you.
If Team Blue can't deliver wins for the average person and lose their votes, that's on them and their failures, not the GOP.
*****************
“The search for a scapegoat is the easiest of all hunting expeditions.” ― Dwight D. Eisenhower
My take?
The Democratic Party really doesn't care about climate change more than what is need to virtue signal to get into the national daily media cycle to ensure valuable unpaid coverage, hope to energize their base enough to come out and vote and to have a media optics hedge to say "Look, we are all going to choke to death on greenhouse gases because of the Republicans!"
Tim says all actions and proposals for climate change have come exclusively from Team Blue for decades now. OK, and what did they deliver for the American people and the entire world? What did they do when they had their chance? Tim wants you to bet on proven losers to deal with climate change. What Tim is not going to talk about is these failures often materialize around simple self inflicted chaos within the Democratic Party and it's own ranks.
Tim wants you to use his blank check to blame Republicans because he always wants you to blame the GOP. For everything.
Do any of you believe effective climate change can be achieved by dogmatically voting Democrat no matter what given their legacy around "Go Green" failure?
I'll leave this here for others to discuss.
The party doesn’t even seem to realize that it’s blowing a once-in-a-decade chance to pass meaningful climate legislation....Missing was any sense that this legislation is a make-or-break moment for the broader Democratic caucus. Gone was any suggestion that if Democrats fail to pass a bill this term, then America’s climate commitment under the Paris Agreement will be out of reach, and worse heat waves, larger wildfires, and damaging famines across the country and around the world within the next decade and a half will be all but assured....
Pelosi did not seem to understand, really, why Congress needed to pass a climate law this session. (She seemed to blame the fossil-fuel industry for the current Congress’s inaction.) ... Climate action was “for the children” in the 1990s. “We’re not doing this for the children,” Kate Larsen, an energy analyst at the Rhodium Group, told me after the event. “We’re doing this for us!” Heat waves hot enough to cook human flesh are already happening this month; they will become more common over the coming decades, striking multiple times a year. Unbearable droughts, sea-level rise so high as to break levees, and unpredictable famines will characterize life. Most of the world’s coral reefs, including the Great Barrier Reef, will undergo bleaching every few years, meaning the water will be so hot that the coral will eject their symbiotic microorganisms into the water, starving themselves in the process....
The speech seemed to punctuate the collapse of climate politics over the past year. During the campaign, Biden described climate change as one of the country’s four major overlapping crises. Yet his administration seems to be sleepwalking toward inaction.... Five months ago, Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat of West Virginia, killed Biden’s Build Back Better bill after the White House repeatedly ignored his attempts to pare it down. Since then, Democrats have been stuck in limbo, with Manchin laying out some of his terms for a replacement bill, and Democrats neglecting to put together a new bill reflecting those terms. It now seems likely that Democrats will lose control of Congress with only a bipartisan infrastructure bill to show for their trouble....
...At the same time, the Biden administration could soon lose its ability to regulate climate change at all. The Supreme Court could restrict the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gases this term. It could also curtail Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that gives executive agencies more freedom to operate when the underlying law is unclear. In the past, both concepts have been central to Democratic climate-rule making. Both could be gone by 2023...What all of this means is that, the next time a climate-skeptical president takes office, advocates will have fewer tools to constrain their behavior than last time. And they will have no future to point to: If Democrats couldn’t pass a climate bill in 2009 or 2022, why should anyone have any hope that they’ll try to do it again, or be able to?
By Robinson Meyer May 11, 2022
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2022/05/nancy-pelosi-democrats-climate-change-bill/629822/
Direct Headline: House Democrats urge Biden to pass climate change portion of Build Back Better
House Democrats have reupped calls for President Joe Biden to move ahead with the $555 billion in climate change investments already passed by the House as part of the Build Back Better Act....The package has stalled for more than a month in the Senate after Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., sank the bill by opposing it in December....The climate portion of the legislation represents the largest-ever federal investment in clean energy....The climate investments in Build Back Better largely come through tax incentives for low-emissions energy sources....The bill’s biggest spending components include 10-year tax credits to expand and accelerate investments in renewable power, including wind, solar and nuclear. It has a proposal to provide an electric vehicle tax credit of up to $12,500 for vehicles made at a unionized factory in the U.S. It would invest in new research for carbon capture technology and create a Civilian Climate Corps to spur job growth and conserve public lands, among other things....
...Manchin, who comes from the coal-rich state of West Virginia and profits from a coal consulting business he founded, has indicated he is open to passing standalone climate provisions outside of the BBB legislation, including production tax credits for the solar and wind sectors....Manchin previously rejected the bill’s proposed clean electricity program. The initial key component of the president’s framework would have incentivized energy companies to shift away from fossil fuels to clean energy and penalized companies that did not....Manchin also opposed a proposed fee on emissions of methane, a potent planet-warming gas, as well as a provision that would provide tax credits to some electric vehicle consumers....
Emma Newburger, Feb 1 2022 5:15 PM EST
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/01/democrats-urge-biden-to-pass-climate-change-part-of-build-back-better.html
Direct Headline: Climate change: Democratic alarmism leads to failing policies
Climate change needs to be addressed but the Democrats' plan is alarmist and not going to save the planet. We need to weigh costs and benefits of climate action....Over the past few decades, climate change has been cast in ever more apocalyptic terms. A new global survey shows that almost half the world’s population and about 4 of 10 Americans believe global warming will likely lead to the extinction of the human race.... However, such scare scenarios are ideal for politicians; they can promise to save the world, and they can leave the substantial bill to future election cycles....
....Yes, climate change is a real challenge that we need to tackle smartly. But suggesting it is an “existential threat” to human existence, as Joe Biden frequently claims, causes us to panic and make poor decisions. Instead, we need to weigh costs and benefits of climate action....This doesn’t mean there aren’t real benefits to cutting emissions....the Democratic plan contains no cost estimates, despite its intention to fundamentally restructure the growth engine of the U.S. Only one nation — New Zealand — has been bold enough to request an independent cost estimate of cutting emissions to zero by 2050. The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research found that the optimistic cost would reduce GDP by a whopping 16% each year by 2050. Translated to the projected U.S. GDP in 2050, this would imply a cost of at least $5 trillion in today’s money. Not just once, but every year. That is more than the entire pre-Covid-19 annual federal spending of $4.5 trillion....
Needless to say, spending 16% or more to avoid part of a 2% problem is a bad deal. But Democrats are not alone. Many countries have made spectacular promises to cut emissions and failed....That is why Democrats — and all of us — should focus more on solutions that will actually be effective and realistic. Currently, cutting emissions is costly and involves subsidizing inefficient solar, wind, and electric cars. Rich countries can afford a little, though none can afford to dramatically switch.... Proposing unrealistic and extremely expensive policies is unhelpful. The Democrats are correct to emphasize we need climate policies, but the policies must be smart....
Bjorn Lomborg 7/23/20
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/23/climate-change-overreaction-democrats-need-realistic-solutions-column/5434178002/
Direct Headline: From college to climate, Democrats are sealing their doom by selling out young voters | Will Bunch
....But just nine months into the 46th presidency, Biden is struggling to earn even that “C+” on his first report card from America’s young voters. The last week of headlines — that free community college is completely dropped from the Democrats’ economic plan ....along with the Godot-like wait for major action on student debt — has shaken many teen and 20-something voters who hoped for more.....“It’s insulting that we’re not being given a seat at the table after helping deliver Biden his victory in November....And it’s absolutely devastating, honestly, that our future is being neglected to the extent that it is ... Young people are going to bear the burden of these policy blunders....”
...But what should the United States expect next from young people who’ve seen such little substantial change ....“It’s like a knife stabbed you in the back,”....While college voters, in particular, strongly supported left-wing Sens. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren in early Democratic primaries, they overcame any qualms about Biden’s past record to rally behind him....Researchers at Tufts University found 18-29-year-old turnout had increased substantially — from about 42% to 44% in 2016, when youth apathy was one key to Trump’s victory, to a 52% to 56% range last year. Those young voters went for Biden, 61% to 36%, and the Tufts team found their votes put the Democrat over the top in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Arizona.
Simply put, under-30 voters handed Biden the Electoral College......
.....“College students are issue voters,” ....find young voters are less wedded to party ID and more focused toward action on issues like climate or gun safety, while older voters are more drawn toward “electability,” the factor that drove Biden’s 2020 march to the Democratic nomination.....
Will Bunch Oct 21, 2021
https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/biden-democrats-young-voters-community-college-climate-20211021.html
Direct Headline: How Does 'Boss' AOC Plan To Pay For Her $93 Trillion Green New Deal?
Environmentalism: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has declared herself "boss" of the "Green New Deal." Maybe she can explain were the money will come from to pay its $93 trillion cost. Because taxing the rich won't even scratch the surface.....Ocasio-Cortez's response: "Some people are like, 'Oh, it's unrealistic, oh it's fake, oh it doesn't address this little minute thing. And I'm like, 'You try! You do it.' 'Cause you're not. 'Cause you're not. So, until you do it, I'm the boss. How 'bout that?"
....A new analysis from the American Action Forum finds that the Green New Deal, as laid out by New York Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey, would cost up to $93 trillion in the first ten years.
Remember, the GND isn't just about converting the entire U.S. energy supply to renewable energy in a decade and establishing a "zero emissions transportation system."...The plan also includes things like "guaranteed" federal jobs, "universal health care," and "food security."....Despite the GND's name, it's the proposals that have nothing to do with climate change that cost the most. The price tag for a federal guaranteed jobs program could run as much as $44.6 trillion over the next decade. The "universal health care" plan? $36 trillion.....
....All told, the cost of the "green" part of the Green New Deal would run from $8.3 trillion to $12.3 trillion over the next 10 years, according to the AAF report. The rest of it would cost an additional $42.8 trillion to $80.6 trillion....Looked at another way, economists expect the entire U.S. gross domestic product over the next decade to total $266 trillion.....What's most shocking about the Green New Deal is that so many leading Democrats, many of whom very much hope one day to be president, are blindly embracing it....
Investors 01:00 AM ET 02/26/2019
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/green-new-deal-93-trillion-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/
************
https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/771204-climate-change-thread-un-report-we-need-to-take-action/?do=findComment&comment=24077538
timschochet 158.8k Posted 06/22/22 8:36 AM
All I’m saying is that if climate change is for you the overriding issue of our time (as it is for me) then there’s no way you can support anyone but the Democrats as imperfect as they’ve been. The response “well the Democrats don’t have any solutions either” doesn’t fly because in the past 30 years (ever since this issue began to arise as an impending crisis) 100% of all proposals and actions and ideas to combat it have been from Democrats. 100%!! The only thing Republicans have done during that time is either deny it, downplay it, or simply oppose every proposal because it might hurt the economy (as they’re doing right now.) There is no way to avoid the verdict that if you support Republicans, you are supporting doing nothing about climate change.
***********
I started this top level thread to address the comments by @timschochet that the only hope for positive long term climate change will come from blindly voting for the Democratic Party.
I disagree.
1) Joe Biden and the Biden Administration ( Let's call it Susan Rice And The Jackie Aprile Jr Collective informally....) had an opportunity to untether their climate change proposals out of Build Back Better to appeal to Joe Manchin to vote their way. But the Democratic Party did what it always does - Shove overly complex fat political pork, big donor corporate interests and quid pro quo for the wealthy elite that keep them in office, by the truckload into any bill.
Team Blue had the sitting POTUS and a majority in Congress. If they can't cut a deal or modify a deal or negotiate with a lone holdout, that's on them, not the GOP.
Would it have killed the Democratic Party to aim for something that dealt more with practical climate policy in stages and less about keeping the corporate donor overlords happy and full of fat political pork? Would it have killed Team Blue to offer something smaller and "non porky" that would generate actual bipartisan support to work around Manchin's holdout?
2) WikiLeaks made it clear that Hillary Clinton conspired with then DNC HQ head Debbie Wasserman Schultz to steal the 2016 DNC ticket from Bernie Sanders. While I personally see Sanders as complete unhinged socialist empty suit, I won't deny he was the closest that Team Blue had come to getting a true "climate concerned/climate as the first priority" POTUS in office. Except he was shafted by his own Party apparatus.
If the Democratic Party and the DNC cared so much about climate change, how about not sticking a knife in the back of Bernie Sanders? That's on them, not the GOP.
3) During the Obama Administration, "Cool Guy President" had his chance with the necessary filibuster proof majority in Congress to push effective and long term positive climate change legislation. Did he make the most of that opportunity? He did not. In fact, Obama oversaw record breaking oil drilling and gas extraction and enabling Big Oil while courting other Big Corporate interests. Then he demanded everyone thank him for it.
If you miss your effective window when you have, again, the sitting POTUS and a majority in Congress, that's on you, not the GOP.
4) AOC, once Sanders kept getting knifed by his own Party, became the new standard bearer for Progressives with fighting for climate change. What did she do? She did what Democrats always do, again, fill the proposal with massive political pork. The rough estimates for Green New Deal was around a WTF inducing 93 trillion. As Bjorn Lomberg of USA Today points out - You can't just have band aid virtue signaling policy being pushed forward, it needs to be smart functional measured policy that has a practical pathway for success. AOC never answers the hard question. Who is going to pay that? How could America pay for that? AOC denounced all criticism, shouting "I'm the boss!"
If Team Blue enables and pushes forward someone like AOC, who single-handedly crushes the future prospects of anyone taking some version of Green New Deal seriously, then that's on the Democratic Party and the Progressives and AOC, not the GOP.
5) Biden is only in office, in part, because younger voters made a difference for him in key battleground areas. What does he do? Renege on each and every promise he made to them. If you want your public policy to take hold and survive legal scrutiny, you need majorities. You need to win POTUS, take a major share of the seats in Congress and have your side of the aisle have an advantage in numbers in SCOTUS. How do you do that? You win a crap load of elections. Just keep winning and keep getting your people and loyalists into office, and you'll have the numbers to push the policy you want and have it be upheld.
How you don't win those elections is make promises and outright lie to people and not deliver on what you assured them would happen to make their lives better. You can't complain about policy you want, like climate change, not becoming reality if you don't rack up lots of those needed wins. You need to enrich the the day to day lives of every day working class citizens to achieve that. If you help them, they will actually want to come out and vote for you.
If Team Blue can't deliver wins for the average person and lose their votes, that's on them and their failures, not the GOP.
*****************
“The search for a scapegoat is the easiest of all hunting expeditions.” ― Dwight D. Eisenhower
My take?
The Democratic Party really doesn't care about climate change more than what is need to virtue signal to get into the national daily media cycle to ensure valuable unpaid coverage, hope to energize their base enough to come out and vote and to have a media optics hedge to say "Look, we are all going to choke to death on greenhouse gases because of the Republicans!"
Tim says all actions and proposals for climate change have come exclusively from Team Blue for decades now. OK, and what did they deliver for the American people and the entire world? What did they do when they had their chance? Tim wants you to bet on proven losers to deal with climate change. What Tim is not going to talk about is these failures often materialize around simple self inflicted chaos within the Democratic Party and it's own ranks.
Tim wants you to use his blank check to blame Republicans because he always wants you to blame the GOP. For everything.
Do any of you believe effective climate change can be achieved by dogmatically voting Democrat no matter what given their legacy around "Go Green" failure?
I'll leave this here for others to discuss.
Last edited by a moderator:
