From Vague Document To Action Plan
...............
Eating breakfast on Tuesday morning, before heading to work, I read a Kevin Drum column. Basically, he was asking what the Green New Deal action plan is.
So, here we go. This is what I'd suggest:
The voice we use should be the tone we'd use speaking to wavering voters in the MidWest--which is easy for me, because I live here. But why the MidWest? Because the obvious first step is to elect a Democratic president in 2020 (otherwise, a Green New Deal is all but impossible), and to do that you basically have two choices: take back Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, or, try to win Florida and North Carolina--which haven't been both Blue since Obama's 2008 win; or possibly some mix of Arizona, Texas, Georgia--some of which have been Red since Bill Clinton in the '90s.
Once we acknowledge that the MidWest is the most likely focus, we then imagine ourselves speaking with voters there. What do we say? There's no question that inspiration is required--that's why the GND combines environmental with economic goals. But how inspirational need we be? Whatever it takes to get turnout cranked up among the base, but not too pie-in-the-sky, such that the MidWest's wavering swing vote is scared off.
Plus, a reasonably inspiring message takes one more thing: hope. And while Climate Change can be painted as a hopeless mess, there is hope, especially if once we win, we keep winning, in 2022 and 2024. But, to keep winning, we want several easily achievable successes, building to bigger and bigger triumphs, as opposed to trying to bite off too much right away, losing steam and then elections, if we fall short (see 2010's tax on carbon).
Above all else, we should avoid using a tone of voice that isn't focused.
Right, but what about the actual plan? And how to pay for it.
The recent book, Drawdown, (link), which I've been reading, lays out dozens of possibilities for action. Below, I'll enumerate those that seem the likeliest for us. Essentially, we already know how to do this. All we need is the determination and funding.
So, about the money....
* Do not propose a carbon tax. Remember, we're speaking to wavering MidWest voters who for whatever reason did not vote, or voted for Trump in 2016.
* A more likely approach is a worldwide pact, negotiated with our enemies, to lower defense spending on all sides, with the resultant peace dividend used to fund the Green New Deal--along with similar efforts in all countries.
* Once a new president and senate pass the GND, 1% of our military budget would be enough for a goodwill, unilateral gesture, for the first year of negotiations that would add nations to our pact. And, the more we actually make peace, the better the world's prospects. A mere 10% of worldwide military spending would be our target for the third year. If sustained for the next six, we'd have enough funds to reach the estimate identified by the IPCC (link).
And the environmental spending....
Here we have a few easily understood, attractive ways forward. There are others that are technical, or not as wonderful sounding (refrigerant management is #1 in the book). They can all be viewed at Drawdown's website (link).
A five point countdown:
5. Planting Forests (and seaweed beds)
4. Regenerative Agriculture -- letting organic matter build up in our soils.
3. Electrified Cars and Trucks
2. Solar (rooftop and large arrays)
1. Wind
And what about those economic goals we might put forward to attract voters?
Another five point countdown:
5. Consolidate ObamaCare, adding a Public Option
4. Fund state-run Energy Conservation plans that hire millions
3. Create Tax Incentives to boost our five environmental ways forward
2. Significantly increase the Earned Income Tax Credit
1. Normalize Child Care For All
Then, several years down the road, once 2020 is in the 'win' column, and the GND is passed in early 2021, move on to even more ambitious ideas. Until then, limit ourselves to a fairly modest list of goals that can pass the senate and head us in a new direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment