“The ‘is’ and ‘is not’ of the Green New Deal” April 28, 2019 Dr. Roger Ray
Taken from legislation proposed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the creation of a Green New Deal
(i) The select committee shall have authority to develop a detailed national, industrial, economic mobilization plan (hereinafter in this section referred to as the “Plan for a Green New Deal” or the “Plan”) for the transition of the United States economy to become greenhouse gas emissions neutral and to significantly draw down greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and oceans and to promote economic and environmental justice and equality. In furtherance of the foregoing, the Plan shall: (a) be prepared in consultation with experts and leaders from business, labor, state and local governments, tribal nations, academia and broadly representative civil society groups and communities; (b) be driven by the federal government, in collaboration, co-creation and partnership with business, labor, state and local governments, tribal nations, research institutions and civil society groups and communities; (c) be executed in no longer than 10 years from the start of execution of such Plan; (d) provide opportunities for high income work, entrepreneurship and cooperative and public ownership; and (e) additionally, be responsive to, and in accordance with, the goals and guidelines relating to social, economic, racial, regional and gender-based justice and equality set forth in paragraph (6).
In the history of our planet, there have been five major periods of extinction. These have been caused when the earth suddenly gets too cold or too hot to sustain the species of plant, animal, and marine life that had evolved up to that point in time.
The largest of our five previous periods of extinction, the one that happened 250 million years ago, and is called “The Great Dying,” wiped out 95% of plant and animal life and nearly ended all life on our planet. The Great Dying was caused by volcanic activity in the middle of a massive coal reserve in Siberia. The coal was ignited, and it burned for years, filling the atmosphere with carbon greenhouse gases, making the earth hotter and hotter.
It took millions of years to get all of that carbon out of the atmosphere and sequester it in polar ice caps and in the earth. Now, these are things that could happen again. Tectonic movement, volcanic activity, another giant asteroid, could set another mass extinction in motion and, in spite of what sci fi movies predict, it is anything but certain that we could do anything to stop it.
But we are now on the leading edge of what can only be called the 6thperiod of mass extinction. Humans have always burned wood, oil, and coal for light or to keep warm, but about 150 years ago, as we began a modern era of industrialization, the amount of carbon we were releasing from the earth and putting back into the atmosphere began to escalate. We are now pumping carbon out of the ground and into the air ten times faster than that burning Siberian coal field did during the “Great Dying.”
These are not “ifs” or “maybes,” these are scientific facts. The question is whether we will be able to change course in time to curtail the rising sea levels and temperatures, and to save as much of our biodiversity as possible. A crucial thing for us to understand is that we cannot continue in this direction, telling ourselves that the worst affects will come after we are gone. There is, in fact, another generation to be considered. The now 16 year-old climate activist from Sweden, Greta Thunberg is telling the world how things really are:
(show 1:20 video)
The youngest member of congress in American history, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, proposed the “Green New Deal” on her first day in Congress. It is not legislation and it isn’t even a plan. It is a 14-page long resolution that you can read in less than 10 minutes that simply outlines goals and presents only the broadest suggestions of methods.
Though critics have called her crazy or stupid and have told all manner of lies about the resolution, saying that it will ban all air flight, private automobiles, the production of beef and pork, none of this is in the Green New Deal. These are all just lies.
For much the same reason that I wanted you to hear Greta Thunberg’s voice, I want you to hear the goals of the Green New Deal in the voice of a person who will be affected by it much more than most of us:
(1) it is the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal—
(A) to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers;
(B) to create millions of good, high-wage jobs and ensure prosperity and economic security for all people of the United States;
(C) to invest in the infrastructure and industry of the United States to sustainably meet the challenges of the 21st century;
00:0
(D) to secure for all people of the United
(D) to secure for all people of the United
States for generations to come— (i) clean air and water;
(ii) climate and community resiliency; (iii) healthy food;
(iv) access to nature; and
(v) a sustainable environment; and
(iv) access to nature; and
(v) a sustainable environment; and
(E) to promote justice and equity by stopping current, preventing future, and repairing historic oppression of indigenous peoples, com- munities of color, migrant communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, and youth (referred to in this resolution as ‘‘frontline and vulnerable communities’’);
We have seen this crisis coming for decades and any suggestion that we take the radical steps necessary to correct our course has been met with objections that economic and standard of living impacts would be too great. And, maybe that is true, so that the only reasonable way to address that very practical concern is to combine the climate saving changes with changes to our economic system so that the two support and feed one another. It is not that it cannot be done. In fact, it must be done, but the two factors of environment and economy must be transformed simultaneously.
Critics say that the economic changes are socialist and I am getting about as tired of hearing that word used as a scare tactic as I became of hearing all of the reasons why schools couldn’t be desegregated, why homosexuals had to act straight, and why women can’t have equal pay. As Harry Truman said,
Though where he says “20 years” we have to hear “80 years.” Truman said: Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. Socialism is what they called public power.
Socialism is what they called Social Security.
Socialism is what they called farm price supports.
Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.
Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.
Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.”
It should be easy to see that given so many lies, so many misrepresentations, and so much childish name calling, that the right is afraid of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez but even more, they are afraid of the powerful logic behind the necessary changes listed in the Green New Deal. But, possibly our more serious challenge, is opposition from those we would like to think of as being allies.
I want to be careful about criticizing legislators who have decades of success under their belts. Both Senator Feinstein and Speaker Pelosi have a lot of legislative victories to their credit, but both have tried to be dismissive of the Green New Deal by saying that it goes too far. . . that it is too ambitious, that it will never be passed. They want to offer their own versions of a Green Deal that will be scaled back and easier to get passed.
Now, I want you to hear me out on this. You may not agree with me, but I implore you to think about it: When you propose something big, something really life changing that can both save the planet and restore a middle class in a secure economy, that’s exciting. That’s worth fighting for, worth pounding the pavement, marching, knocking doors, donating, voting for. But the more you trim the proposal, the less enthusiasm you inspire.
When you get it down to changes that won’t really save the planet and won’t create living wage jobs in a changed economy, then you will get the people to come out and vote who vote for the lesser of two evils but you make it very easy for the idealists to stay home.
Again, I’m not trying to make anyone mad and you have every right to disagree with me, but in 2016, we were told that things like tuition free college and universal health care were just too much, in fact, it was crazy to say that we could have it. The DNC gave us a “safe choice” that was better than the other choice but a choice that would still favor big banks, big pharma, big insurance companies, and corporate interests and the safe choice lost.
Pelosi and Feinstein want to hold the middle ground and stay safe. I am not alone in feeling like the middle of the road is for yellow stripes and dead armadillos. My position is this: Aim high because the future of the human race is at stake. Aim high, because aiming low has never, never, never, never worked.
I am asking you to think beyond identity politics. Yes, I was very glad that in 2008 we got our first black president, but folks, in spite of all of the class, and soaring speeches, you know that Obama was not really a progressive. You know that, right? He was a moderate at best and in many ways, a corporate conservative.
It is time for a woman to be president. I would love to see a woman of color become president. But it would also be great to have an openly gay president. Shoot, I could get excited about having our first Jewish president.
But I think we have to get past identity politics.
You know that I am on shaky ground when I try to use a sports illustration but let me try this just once: Think of the issues we see in the Green New Deal that can save our planet and our economy…. Retrofitting all existing buildings and building new buildings to be energy efficient and carbon neutral. . . investing heavily in mass transit, replacing a lot of air travel with train travel, . . . building a power grid that can make renewables replace all oil, gas, and coal power generation . . . instituting new farming techniques that till less and produce less greenhouse gases, and see this collection of issues as a football that we want to get over the goal line.
If you are the coach, do you care if a white person or a black person carries the ball over the goal line? Do you care if it is a younger person or an older person? Do you really care if the person who can carry the ball over the goal line is a man or a woman, straight or gay? If you are a sane coach, what you want is to get the ball into the end zone, right?
Right now, we have 20-plus players on the bench and that is a lot of players. By and large, I am excited by the field of candidates we have to choose from, and I don’t want to dismiss any of them out of hand because I just want to get the ball over the goal line. Now, some of these players have already said that they don’t want to carry our ball… and they can just head on back to the showers. I like all of them, but I am not married to any of them . . . is Tulsi Gabbard single? . . . stay focused! It doesn’t matter who carries the ball, we just need to get the ball over the goal line this time.
They say that in the primaries we fall in love but in the general election we fall in line. I don’t like the sound of it, but, like most of you, most of the time I go to vote, I have to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two evils but as Ralph Nader has
Men and women, we and our ancestors over the past century have lit the fuse on the 6thmass extinction of life on this planet. This is no time for half measures. This is no time for compromise or premature surrender. How is my English? Do you understand me? Sometimes I am forced to wonder.
