4 ms·

Personally I'm more concerned about the absolutely tepid response by folks who allegedly believe in climate change. I don't know how we are going to put a dent

Personally I'm more concerned about the absolutely tepid response by folks who allegedly believe in climate change. I don't know how we are going to put a dent in climate change without something like carbon pricing (something that incentivizes us to reduce our carbon emissions). Instead the best case is that we're going to write progressives a check for $3.5T and they'll use a little bit of it to create a "civilian climate corps" and rebates for EVs and EV charging stations. Not the response I would expect to an existential threat. Yeah, it's fun to blame Republicans for not believing in climate change (and they deserve a lot of blame), but I have a much harder time with people who profess a belief in climate change but behave like climate policy is a nice-to-have. Downvoters: How are the Democratic reconciliation bill's climate provisions up to the challenge of tackling climate change? Why is climate change a middling priority on the agenda? Or is it all just okay because the Republicans are worse (i.e., we shouldn't let Democratic failure to address climate change distract from the more important work of blaming-Republicans-as-sport)?

jacquesm 5y ago
That's because quite a few of them have already simply given up. This oil tanker that we've built is not made to turn on a dime and that's what it would take to solve this. So it's a mitigation action at best at this point, reduce the force of the impact and look after your own. It's pretty sad in a way.
danaris 5y ago
You seem to be conflating the broader progressive ideology with the frustrating realities of trying to pass specific policies into law. The reason what we're getting out of Washington doesn't include enough to fight climate change may not be absolutely 100% the fault of the Republican Party, but it's enough that blaming the Democrats for it to any meaningful extent just smacks of disingenuous both-sides-ism.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  I'm not talking about broader progressive ideology at all (apart from a belief that climate change is a real existential threat that requires significant immediate action), I'm talking about the priorities of the current crop of progressive Democratic politicians (and/or Democrats more broadly).
  - danaris 5y ago
    I guarantee you the progressive Democratic politicians have climate change as a high priority—and "Democrats more broadly", depending on how you define it, don't have anything remotely resembling a coherent agenda. The progressives don't get to make laws all on their own. Even a single lost Democratic vote on a bill means it doesn't make it past the Senate, and Senators Manchin and Sinema have both made it abundantly clear that they have no interest in fighting back against the Republican obstructionism to advance a positive agenda for the country. I'm frankly surprised that anything got passed at all, given their resistance in the past few months.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      I'm not sure I agree entirely with your characterization, but the salient bit that we seem to agree on is that Democrats profess a belief in the existential threat of climate change and still aren't organized to combat it. That seems like a bigger problem than Republican obstructionism (what is there to obstruct if Dems don't even have a coherent, remotely realistic plan)? While progressives are aligned on the Green New Deal, that's little more than a slogan (no draft legislation or anything). To the extent that it's fleshed out (e.g., AOC's Green New Deal resolution), it seems to mean "decarbonize energy sector by 2030 + fix racial injustice + implement European social democracy + universal healthcare + affordable housing + stronger union protections + etc". Basically the "Green New Deal" isn't a plan to fix the climate, it's a progressive trojan horse. This doesn't seem like real concern about climate change to me. To be clear, the point isn't "progressives are the worst", it's that no faction or party is doing a great job here, but we're too preoccupied with figuring out who is the worst to actually move forward. EDIT: Added the last two paragraphs, apologies for any confusion caused.
      - danaris 5y ago
        From my perspective, the bigger problem by far is that everyone to the right of our skewed American political center (this includes some Democrats, particularly those I named) do not believe that it is critical to take any action at all on climate change. The more people agree "yes, we need to solve problem X", the more likely it is that we (collectively) can get something passed to start moving toward change, even if we don't entirely agree on the severity of the problem or the precise methods needed to combat it. Or, to put it another way: If the Republicans weren't being obstructionist, the Democrats wouldn't need a strategy to overcome them. They'd be able to put their energy toward coming up with actual policy solutions. Finally, it is my understanding (though I don't have the link handy right now) that the Biden campaign put out a fairly clear set of legislative goals to push for in order to combat climate change. So while it's certainly true that "Democrats", broadly, don't all agree on what to do, a) that's essentially a tautology (not just of Democrats, though they tend to be less likely to fall in line with a centralized message and agenda than Republicans), and b) that's not at all the same thing as saying "Congressional Democrats and the White House have advanced no clear legislative goals toward combating climate change."

jacquesm 5y ago

That's because quite a few of them have already simply given up. This oil tanker that we've built is not made to turn on a dime and that's what it would take to solve this. So it's a mitigation action at best at this point, reduce the force of the impact and look after your own. It's pretty sad in a way.

danaris 5y ago

You seem to be conflating the broader progressive ideology with the frustrating realities of trying to pass specific policies into law. The reason what we're getting out of Washington doesn't include enough to fight climate change may not be absolutely 100% the fault of the Republican Party, but it's enough that blaming the Democrats for it to any meaningful extent just smacks of disingenuous both-sides-ism.

throwaway894345 5y ago
I'm not talking about broader progressive ideology at all (apart from a belief that climate change is a real existential threat that requires significant immediate action), I'm talking about the priorities of the current crop of progressive Democratic politicians (and/or Democrats more broadly).
- danaris 5y ago
  I guarantee you the progressive Democratic politicians have climate change as a high priority—and "Democrats more broadly", depending on how you define it, don't have anything remotely resembling a coherent agenda. The progressives don't get to make laws all on their own. Even a single lost Democratic vote on a bill means it doesn't make it past the Senate, and Senators Manchin and Sinema have both made it abundantly clear that they have no interest in fighting back against the Republican obstructionism to advance a positive agenda for the country. I'm frankly surprised that anything got passed at all, given their resistance in the past few months.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    I'm not sure I agree entirely with your characterization, but the salient bit that we seem to agree on is that Democrats profess a belief in the existential threat of climate change and still aren't organized to combat it. That seems like a bigger problem than Republican obstructionism (what is there to obstruct if Dems don't even have a coherent, remotely realistic plan)? While progressives are aligned on the Green New Deal, that's little more than a slogan (no draft legislation or anything). To the extent that it's fleshed out (e.g., AOC's Green New Deal resolution), it seems to mean "decarbonize energy sector by 2030 + fix racial injustice + implement European social democracy + universal healthcare + affordable housing + stronger union protections + etc". Basically the "Green New Deal" isn't a plan to fix the climate, it's a progressive trojan horse. This doesn't seem like real concern about climate change to me. To be clear, the point isn't "progressives are the worst", it's that no faction or party is doing a great job here, but we're too preoccupied with figuring out who is the worst to actually move forward. EDIT: Added the last two paragraphs, apologies for any confusion caused.
    - danaris 5y ago
      From my perspective, the bigger problem by far is that everyone to the right of our skewed American political center (this includes some Democrats, particularly those I named) do not believe that it is critical to take any action at all on climate change. The more people agree "yes, we need to solve problem X", the more likely it is that we (collectively) can get something passed to start moving toward change, even if we don't entirely agree on the severity of the problem or the precise methods needed to combat it. Or, to put it another way: If the Republicans weren't being obstructionist, the Democrats wouldn't need a strategy to overcome them. They'd be able to put their energy toward coming up with actual policy solutions. Finally, it is my understanding (though I don't have the link handy right now) that the Biden campaign put out a fairly clear set of legislative goals to push for in order to combat climate change. So while it's certainly true that "Democrats", broadly, don't all agree on what to do, a) that's essentially a tautology (not just of Democrats, though they tend to be less likely to fall in line with a centralized message and agenda than Republicans), and b) that's not at all the same thing as saying "Congressional Democrats and the White House have advanced no clear legislative goals toward combating climate change."