On Thursday last week, the Build Back Better package that was to define the first term of the Biden presidency with a combination of climate funding, health care measures and progressive taxation, was declared dead, for the second time.
Obviously Manchin is problematic but he was far more likely to play ball with Biden's agenda the the replacement level senator from West Virginia. The real problem for build back better was that there was never a strong mandate for the democrats following 2020 to begin with. Biden's election was more of a rebuke of Trumpism than a surge of progressivism... unfortunately for those of us who are worried about the climate.
Biden and other prominent Dems who insist on going out of their way to tell voters about the Good Republicans really make it easy for Dems to vote for people like Susan Collins or Hogan as governor. You don't see Republicans doing that, because they care about winning. It's crazy that Biden literally refuses to criticize MITCH MCCONNELL of all people. Recently I heard him comment that Mitch is basically a reasonable guy trying to fight against the far right of his own party. What an insane thing for the leader of the Democrats to believe. Just insane.
Lurking as the most important factor is the US's incredibly undemocratic political system. If the USA were a democracy, and if votes were translated into power, its policies would be incredibly different. That is not how things work here. We do not really have the power to change anything unless we win an election in overwhelming numbers, in specific little pieces of geography. This is obviously intolerable, and young people should make it their life's work to pass something better to the next generation. And young people in the US have overwhelmingly different/more progressive political opinions than the generations that were alive under Reagan do. The next few decades here are going to be full of wild political struggle. Hopefully something good comes out of it.
A word of advice to all climate enthusiasts from an early investor from the 2000s. Alternative energy moves when things are good. Alternative energy is the first to die when things get bad. IF I knew that, then this fumbling administration should know that. Inflating the economy with additional monies, stupid agenda that ignored what was needed for economic recovery and this idea that Joe Biden must kill Vladimir Putin are what sank any hopes for the correct and continued move into cleaner energy.
Blame Joe Biden for once in your lives. He is stupid, but worse he is greedy and dirty. So are his people. 81 million undereducated folks voted not just to remove Trump, but for all the actions that have come since. People buying coal, people deperate for oil. Hell, Joe is begging for oil. Joe waging a losing campaign in Ukraine. Joe (according to Steven Ratther and Larry Summers) stupidly signing and signing more and more money to heat inflation from 1.7% into 9%. And worst of all, no one admits that Fauci's "Stay At Home" policy created the $3 trillion excess money saved in consumers' accounts. People are blind, stupid or lazy... and so is the American media... which just happenes to be married (literally) to liberal politicians and their people.
If you want clean energy and a climate policy, you wasted those chances.
And come Nov 2022, Joe is going to be investigated. The GOP has said so.
That's what voters get. 81 million all hiding the fact that they proved John Maynard Keynes right.
The American Rescue Plan did not heat inflation from 1.7% to 9%. There are global issues driving this, and the ARP may have slightly increased it.
The Biden admin and Congress were inches away from the finish line on a comprehensive energy supply bill that would have spoken to the energy crunch, manufacturing dependence, and provided fiscal space for innovation. They did everything in their power to drive the transition forward, and made countless attempts to attack drivers of inflation. Congress moves slowly and can't pass anything substantive due to a lack of a meaningful governing coalition. Thus they did everything in their power, they just don't have much power.
Two prominent Obama officials says it did. Steven Rattner, Larry Summers. Can't get more damning than that even for a lib trying to deflect all of Biden's failures.. moreover, the news presents Joe Manchin as "vindicated. Strike two. The job of the president is to keep the ship in the channel. Calling Putin a killer, calling MSB the man behind Khashoggi's murder. Dicking around with federal land and drilling rights, same for offshore. Dude, you truly are a lib.
Second point. $3 trillion in consumer savings thanks to the stupid stay at home policy from Anthony Fauci means two things. Consumer inflation stays until the three trillion is absorbed. And, you have to have a president actually willing to fix supply chain. Alienating Putin by triggering a war with the idea of splitting up Russia, using Ukraine as a pawn and then letting a strong dollar muck over emerging nations, on top of imposing what should be deemed illegal... Sanctions...
Anyone who thinks that $1.9 trillion US spending caused global inflation is a complete moron who has been brainwashed by mainstream media. Surely inflation isn't being caused by huge shifts in buying habits, supply chain snarls, China constantly locking down some of the biggest port cities on the planet, the $10 trillion we gave to the military, or anything like that. It's the $1.9 trillion that we spent on actual problems needing fixing. And someone this is causing inflation in almost every country around the world, many of which have much higher inflation than we did.
Tax cuts to your donors or endless debt-financed money to the war machine are somehow magical, non-inflation causing dollars created out of thin air. Complete bullshit. You are as brainwashed by the MSM as the libs you hate, and it's truly sad. No mind of your own, just confidently asserting obvious lies that make no sense to anyone who thinks about them for 30 seconds. That's the conservative way.
Have any of you actually read any of the bilI? I have dedicated the last decade of my life to climate change and I’m thrilled it didn’t pass. Every “progressive” turd was larded into the bill. I have just founded a Direct Air Capture technology company. With BBB I would have passed and not tried as it would have been impossible to hire people and do business and meet every diversity and union mandate. And “Climate Justice”. As it is every DOE grant has to pass those filters instead of just tackling climate change but BBB was 100x worse. Looking at that fatburg of a bill as seriously related to climate is a lazy and false lens. Now that it is dead, if Biden doesn’t make too many illegal “emergency” proclamations, maybe we can make progress. The reality as all serious climate transition players have pointed out 40% of the tech we need doesn’t exist and we have no real plan for how to make the transition without disasters like the ones we are seeing in Europe and California and Texas. If we do everything per the Paris accords the climate will start improving in 2080. We have a rough 60 years ahead. And a globe to bring along. Let’s keep moving forward, enhance 45Q. Provide incentives for govt purchasing of lower carbon cement and steel, and provide incentives in the utility regulators for building up the grid now. That way we build up the knowledge and companies we need. And direct air capture is always needed. RIP BBB.
You don't blame the voters enough. If Trump's tax cuts were unpopular enough for Sinema and Manchin's constituents, they would repeal them. They are not stupid; they are self interested political actors. They know that if they scrap them they will be painted as tax raising Democrats, and this is toxic in red states.
Same goes for climate; their voters don't care enough. That single poll, that barely a majority think the US isn't doing enough, doesn't strike me as the voters crying out for ambitious climate policy. Climate change is a high priority for well-educated liberals and that's about it. Look at any poll of "top issues" over the last couple of years, and climate is never even in the top 5:
Climate is too abstract to be at the very top of the list for the vast majority of voters, and it's creating a slow moving disaster in the third world.
This is a lie. The voters vote against Republicans constantly. The US is not a democracy. We have a political system along the lines that most European countries got rid of in the early 1900s. The Senate is our House of Lords. Look at these election results and tell me that the problem is people aren't voting enough. Democrats get 53% of votes and end up with 36% of seats. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Wisconsin_State_Assembly_election
Conservatives have a lock on the courts, which keep 2010 boundaries in place, which ensure that Democrats cannot vote their way out of this unless they put up insanely large majorities. We have been locked out of power for decades and might continue to be. The only hope is the fact that young people overwhelmingly hate the Republican Party and conservative politics more generally. Even in red states, young people overwhelmingly vote Dem. If enough of them stay put instead of leaving for NY/CA, eventually, over the course of mass political struggle over the next few decades, we should be able to win enough to take actual power. Whenever that happens, we had better hope we have enough Senators, or members of important courts, in power who actually commit to creating a real democracy with their laws or decisions. Insisting that we have one now and that this is the fault of the voters is a lie. In any democratic country, where votes translate to power, this would look much differently. Your voter-blaming is simply a means of coping with your inability to understand the US political system.
You're right that rural votes count for more in America, I'm not a fan of the system as is. But you can't pretend like if only there were no electoral college Dems would have a supermajority. Dems winning just over half the popular vote is just that: a little over half. You're right that they would be in power more, but moderate Dems aren't exactly climate champions, and a proportional system might make the AOC wing slightly more powerful, but only slightly.
Which of those polls I listed above are lies? If you think the median U.S. voter is crying out for the Green New Deal, you're deluding yourself. The only candidates who list climate policy at the very top of their ticket are those whose base are the urban and educated/ young people. The reality is that a good 40% of the electorate (GOP) don't care at all, and of the remaining 60%, maybe half actually care.
"But you can't pretend like if only there were no electoral college Dems would have a supermajority" It's a good thing that isn't what I said. You are trying to act like the electoral college is the only nondemocratic thing we have governing us. The Senate is not democratic at all. It is the same as the upper houses of legislatures other Western countries had until around World War 1. They abolished them because they gave the wealthy more power than the average person, and this was not acceptable. We never did that, and here we are. The same goes for state and local elections. You completely ignored the fact that Republicans since 2010 have enacted a regime in many states that allows them to "win" 64% of seats with a minority of votes, as I showed you evidence of. This is not democracy. It is rule by force. This is about much more than the electoral college. You should learn more about the American political system, which you currently do not know much about. Nobody mentioned the Green New Deal until you did. You seem to make up a lot of strawman accusations because you are incapable of actually reading, comprehending, and addressing arguments people put forward to you. Try again kid.
I am aware of how the Senate works dude. I do not dispute that it's undemocratic. I do not dispute that the GOP thrives off of the undemocratic nature of the system. I just don't think it matters more than how voters have actually expressed their preferences up to this point.
My logic is this: socioeconomic transformation of the US, of the kind needed to meet the current challenge of climate change, would require a massive public mandate to be enacted. Regardless of whether it's the current system or some kind of proportional voting German style system, there is no evidence that US voters would be ready to deliver such a mandate. You've failed to show me any evidence that the average American voter has climate as a top priority.
The last time a party held 60% of the seats in the House (not the Senate) was 1991-1993. At the start of the New Deal, FDR had 72%. Those undemocratic systems that you cite were very much operational in 1933. But the public mandate was large enough that much of FDR's agenda got across the finish line and changed American society in a big way. That is, the economy was a large enough concern for a large enough number of voters that they largely beat out the entrenched conservatism (though they didn't get everything they wanted).
Let's examine a test case. What did the Dems do when they had 58 senators and 59% of the House in 09-11? They failed to pass a carbon tax. Why? Because enough Democratic politicians didn't think it was in their interest to push it. Why? Because it's just not that high a priority for voters. Show me evidence to the contrary, if you have it.
Again, I'm on your team. I don't like the American political system. I don't like the GOP. I'm just saying, if 40-45% of voters are eternally anti-climate policy, and 10-15% are almost certainly skeptical or not enthusiastic (undecideds), then that leaves only 40-45% of the electorate that potentially, maybe, might care enough to enact something big. 45% does not a large mandate make!
I think America will slowly and surely reduce carbon output through the private sector. Though the US is behind ambitious goals , it’s getting there. The problem is also elsewhere . For the massive coal fired electric generators in western China , I have no answer and strangely enough the journos don’t like to talk about it much either.
Thanks again for work. Change of Subject: When the war started, I mentioned that in 1941, Von Rundstedt had close to a million Germans & allies attacking basically the same front-from Crimea to the Pripyat Marshes. It was defended by maybe up to a million Russians (NEVER believe any Soviet number from WW2). The initial Russian attacking force this year was only 250,000, now down below 200,000. That's about 4-5 times less than '41-'44. Given that the front in WW2 was never really continuous like the Western Front in WW1, what we have is a very empty battlefield compared to then. At a certain point, this should turn back into a war of movement as the lines are thin and no one has much in the way of reserves, especially the Russians. Based on WW2 experience, if someone knocks a good size hole in the line, it will be difficult to close. For the Ukraine, what defense depth they have are the local militias. They've done ok so far. I have not heard that Russia has organized a similar force. So it would be bad if an Ukrainian force got behind Russian lines. We'll have to see what happens between now & the Fall rains, hopefully in the next 8 weeks.
What you say about Manchin is true but it elides the question of how many hidden Manchins there are in Congress. They can say they favor Build Back Better now but -- if Manchin were to vanish -- would end up voting against it . The Democratic Party may have a few truly well-meaning members, but I've concluded they serve only as window dressing to obscure the true nature of their party, an institution that is thoroughly corrupt across many levels and through multiple networks of outright bribery and self-dealing. Of course, the Republicans are just as bad.
"It is tempting to say that ultimately the problem in the US is that climate is just not popular enough. But that begs the question. Climate is not an issue that asserts itself simply through the force of facts. It is not the same as pollution or a war. Climate is abstract. To join the dots, to make it salient requires political work. Activists, scientists, the media, a few key politicians have, in fact, done that work in the US and the evidence is that they are gaining ground." Adam Tooze
Me: Only 1% of Americans in a recent NYT/Siena College poll named climate change as the most important issue facing the country. According to an analysis of the poll in the Times, concerns about climate change have taken a back seat amid rising gas prices and economic uncertainty.
Dems focusing on tax cuts to pay for BBB has always been part of the Deficit Myth. We don’t use taxes, at the Federal level, to pay for programs, taxes are there to mop up excess liquidity when inflation is rampant, not as it is now do to supply chain constraints due to COVID and Russia/OPEC. Take the tax and spend meme away from the Conservatives, as it’s all about functional finance that we learned in WWII from JM Keynes and Abba Lerner.
Make the progress by passing good infrastructure and climate programs that are sustainable in the long run and most importantly pass a Federal Job Guarantee (living wage, health care and retirement) for all those that want to work, especially on building sustainable infrastructure structure. Our city streets are terrible because we use oil based asphalt that doesn’t pass the lifecycle cost analysis test
The American Congress can find money for fighting wars, but not for fighting climate change, ending poverty, building infrastructure. So what is the European Union going to do? Are they going to sanction the United States? What is Canada's Justin Trudeau going to do? Is he going to sanction the United States? What is Australia's Anthony Albanese going to do? Is he going to sanction the United States?
If Canada, EU, Australia are true friends, they should have long ago spoken out clearly about United States failures to address the true causes of war and conflict in the world. Shameful!
The insane response to Putin in Ukraine is the end of any meaningful climate legislation. Not only did it ensure that fossil fuel security will be imperiled for years going forward, it also got lawmakers back into the old military pork game. While you guys focus on dead on arrival climate legislation these guys are all getting rich larding up military appropriations. There is a new bill every month and opposing it makes you a commie or a nazi or something...politics is such a great business!
The good news is that the US cant do anything about carbon emissions one way or the other as tooze mentions China dwarfs us...the US is not really a player in terms of this game.
What is the role in all of this of what Jane Mayer called ‘dark money’? Is this due solely to the views of Senators and Representatives or to those (Peter Thiel, the Koch family) who line their pockets?
Obviously Manchin is problematic but he was far more likely to play ball with Biden's agenda the the replacement level senator from West Virginia. The real problem for build back better was that there was never a strong mandate for the democrats following 2020 to begin with. Biden's election was more of a rebuke of Trumpism than a surge of progressivism... unfortunately for those of us who are worried about the climate.
Agreed, if Dems wanted a better bill they shouldn’t have dropped the ball on the very winnable 2020 senate races in Maine and North Carolina
Biden and other prominent Dems who insist on going out of their way to tell voters about the Good Republicans really make it easy for Dems to vote for people like Susan Collins or Hogan as governor. You don't see Republicans doing that, because they care about winning. It's crazy that Biden literally refuses to criticize MITCH MCCONNELL of all people. Recently I heard him comment that Mitch is basically a reasonable guy trying to fight against the far right of his own party. What an insane thing for the leader of the Democrats to believe. Just insane.
Lurking as the most important factor is the US's incredibly undemocratic political system. If the USA were a democracy, and if votes were translated into power, its policies would be incredibly different. That is not how things work here. We do not really have the power to change anything unless we win an election in overwhelming numbers, in specific little pieces of geography. This is obviously intolerable, and young people should make it their life's work to pass something better to the next generation. And young people in the US have overwhelmingly different/more progressive political opinions than the generations that were alive under Reagan do. The next few decades here are going to be full of wild political struggle. Hopefully something good comes out of it.
Thanks for this. Thorough. Enlightening. And horribly tragic.
A word of advice to all climate enthusiasts from an early investor from the 2000s. Alternative energy moves when things are good. Alternative energy is the first to die when things get bad. IF I knew that, then this fumbling administration should know that. Inflating the economy with additional monies, stupid agenda that ignored what was needed for economic recovery and this idea that Joe Biden must kill Vladimir Putin are what sank any hopes for the correct and continued move into cleaner energy.
Blame Joe Biden for once in your lives. He is stupid, but worse he is greedy and dirty. So are his people. 81 million undereducated folks voted not just to remove Trump, but for all the actions that have come since. People buying coal, people deperate for oil. Hell, Joe is begging for oil. Joe waging a losing campaign in Ukraine. Joe (according to Steven Ratther and Larry Summers) stupidly signing and signing more and more money to heat inflation from 1.7% into 9%. And worst of all, no one admits that Fauci's "Stay At Home" policy created the $3 trillion excess money saved in consumers' accounts. People are blind, stupid or lazy... and so is the American media... which just happenes to be married (literally) to liberal politicians and their people.
If you want clean energy and a climate policy, you wasted those chances.
And come Nov 2022, Joe is going to be investigated. The GOP has said so.
That's what voters get. 81 million all hiding the fact that they proved John Maynard Keynes right.
The American Rescue Plan did not heat inflation from 1.7% to 9%. There are global issues driving this, and the ARP may have slightly increased it.
The Biden admin and Congress were inches away from the finish line on a comprehensive energy supply bill that would have spoken to the energy crunch, manufacturing dependence, and provided fiscal space for innovation. They did everything in their power to drive the transition forward, and made countless attempts to attack drivers of inflation. Congress moves slowly and can't pass anything substantive due to a lack of a meaningful governing coalition. Thus they did everything in their power, they just don't have much power.
Two prominent Obama officials says it did. Steven Rattner, Larry Summers. Can't get more damning than that even for a lib trying to deflect all of Biden's failures.. moreover, the news presents Joe Manchin as "vindicated. Strike two. The job of the president is to keep the ship in the channel. Calling Putin a killer, calling MSB the man behind Khashoggi's murder. Dicking around with federal land and drilling rights, same for offshore. Dude, you truly are a lib.
Second point. $3 trillion in consumer savings thanks to the stupid stay at home policy from Anthony Fauci means two things. Consumer inflation stays until the three trillion is absorbed. And, you have to have a president actually willing to fix supply chain. Alienating Putin by triggering a war with the idea of splitting up Russia, using Ukraine as a pawn and then letting a strong dollar muck over emerging nations, on top of imposing what should be deemed illegal... Sanctions...
Dude your president is a POS.
But come November, congress is going to fix that
Anyone who thinks that $1.9 trillion US spending caused global inflation is a complete moron who has been brainwashed by mainstream media. Surely inflation isn't being caused by huge shifts in buying habits, supply chain snarls, China constantly locking down some of the biggest port cities on the planet, the $10 trillion we gave to the military, or anything like that. It's the $1.9 trillion that we spent on actual problems needing fixing. And someone this is causing inflation in almost every country around the world, many of which have much higher inflation than we did.
Tax cuts to your donors or endless debt-financed money to the war machine are somehow magical, non-inflation causing dollars created out of thin air. Complete bullshit. You are as brainwashed by the MSM as the libs you hate, and it's truly sad. No mind of your own, just confidently asserting obvious lies that make no sense to anyone who thinks about them for 30 seconds. That's the conservative way.
ARP, genius. Take your case up with Obama's advisors.
Have any of you actually read any of the bilI? I have dedicated the last decade of my life to climate change and I’m thrilled it didn’t pass. Every “progressive” turd was larded into the bill. I have just founded a Direct Air Capture technology company. With BBB I would have passed and not tried as it would have been impossible to hire people and do business and meet every diversity and union mandate. And “Climate Justice”. As it is every DOE grant has to pass those filters instead of just tackling climate change but BBB was 100x worse. Looking at that fatburg of a bill as seriously related to climate is a lazy and false lens. Now that it is dead, if Biden doesn’t make too many illegal “emergency” proclamations, maybe we can make progress. The reality as all serious climate transition players have pointed out 40% of the tech we need doesn’t exist and we have no real plan for how to make the transition without disasters like the ones we are seeing in Europe and California and Texas. If we do everything per the Paris accords the climate will start improving in 2080. We have a rough 60 years ahead. And a globe to bring along. Let’s keep moving forward, enhance 45Q. Provide incentives for govt purchasing of lower carbon cement and steel, and provide incentives in the utility regulators for building up the grid now. That way we build up the knowledge and companies we need. And direct air capture is always needed. RIP BBB.
It's remarkable that the aggregate sum of of the political machine in Washington is so much less than the value of its parts.
You don't blame the voters enough. If Trump's tax cuts were unpopular enough for Sinema and Manchin's constituents, they would repeal them. They are not stupid; they are self interested political actors. They know that if they scrap them they will be painted as tax raising Democrats, and this is toxic in red states.
Same goes for climate; their voters don't care enough. That single poll, that barely a majority think the US isn't doing enough, doesn't strike me as the voters crying out for ambitious climate policy. Climate change is a high priority for well-educated liberals and that's about it. Look at any poll of "top issues" over the last couple of years, and climate is never even in the top 5:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/19/once-again-voters-see-more-urgent-issues-than-burning-planet/
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/02/16/publics-top-priority-for-2022-strengthening-the-nations-economy/
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2020/08/13/important-issues-in-the-2020-election/
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321617/economy-tops-voters-list-key-election-issues.aspx
https://news.gallup.com/poll/276932/several-issues-tie-important-2020-election.aspx
Climate is too abstract to be at the very top of the list for the vast majority of voters, and it's creating a slow moving disaster in the third world.
This is a lie. The voters vote against Republicans constantly. The US is not a democracy. We have a political system along the lines that most European countries got rid of in the early 1900s. The Senate is our House of Lords. Look at these election results and tell me that the problem is people aren't voting enough. Democrats get 53% of votes and end up with 36% of seats. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Wisconsin_State_Assembly_election
Conservatives have a lock on the courts, which keep 2010 boundaries in place, which ensure that Democrats cannot vote their way out of this unless they put up insanely large majorities. We have been locked out of power for decades and might continue to be. The only hope is the fact that young people overwhelmingly hate the Republican Party and conservative politics more generally. Even in red states, young people overwhelmingly vote Dem. If enough of them stay put instead of leaving for NY/CA, eventually, over the course of mass political struggle over the next few decades, we should be able to win enough to take actual power. Whenever that happens, we had better hope we have enough Senators, or members of important courts, in power who actually commit to creating a real democracy with their laws or decisions. Insisting that we have one now and that this is the fault of the voters is a lie. In any democratic country, where votes translate to power, this would look much differently. Your voter-blaming is simply a means of coping with your inability to understand the US political system.
You're right that rural votes count for more in America, I'm not a fan of the system as is. But you can't pretend like if only there were no electoral college Dems would have a supermajority. Dems winning just over half the popular vote is just that: a little over half. You're right that they would be in power more, but moderate Dems aren't exactly climate champions, and a proportional system might make the AOC wing slightly more powerful, but only slightly.
Which of those polls I listed above are lies? If you think the median U.S. voter is crying out for the Green New Deal, you're deluding yourself. The only candidates who list climate policy at the very top of their ticket are those whose base are the urban and educated/ young people. The reality is that a good 40% of the electorate (GOP) don't care at all, and of the remaining 60%, maybe half actually care.
"But you can't pretend like if only there were no electoral college Dems would have a supermajority" It's a good thing that isn't what I said. You are trying to act like the electoral college is the only nondemocratic thing we have governing us. The Senate is not democratic at all. It is the same as the upper houses of legislatures other Western countries had until around World War 1. They abolished them because they gave the wealthy more power than the average person, and this was not acceptable. We never did that, and here we are. The same goes for state and local elections. You completely ignored the fact that Republicans since 2010 have enacted a regime in many states that allows them to "win" 64% of seats with a minority of votes, as I showed you evidence of. This is not democracy. It is rule by force. This is about much more than the electoral college. You should learn more about the American political system, which you currently do not know much about. Nobody mentioned the Green New Deal until you did. You seem to make up a lot of strawman accusations because you are incapable of actually reading, comprehending, and addressing arguments people put forward to you. Try again kid.
I am aware of how the Senate works dude. I do not dispute that it's undemocratic. I do not dispute that the GOP thrives off of the undemocratic nature of the system. I just don't think it matters more than how voters have actually expressed their preferences up to this point.
My logic is this: socioeconomic transformation of the US, of the kind needed to meet the current challenge of climate change, would require a massive public mandate to be enacted. Regardless of whether it's the current system or some kind of proportional voting German style system, there is no evidence that US voters would be ready to deliver such a mandate. You've failed to show me any evidence that the average American voter has climate as a top priority.
The last time a party held 60% of the seats in the House (not the Senate) was 1991-1993. At the start of the New Deal, FDR had 72%. Those undemocratic systems that you cite were very much operational in 1933. But the public mandate was large enough that much of FDR's agenda got across the finish line and changed American society in a big way. That is, the economy was a large enough concern for a large enough number of voters that they largely beat out the entrenched conservatism (though they didn't get everything they wanted).
Let's examine a test case. What did the Dems do when they had 58 senators and 59% of the House in 09-11? They failed to pass a carbon tax. Why? Because enough Democratic politicians didn't think it was in their interest to push it. Why? Because it's just not that high a priority for voters. Show me evidence to the contrary, if you have it.
Again, I'm on your team. I don't like the American political system. I don't like the GOP. I'm just saying, if 40-45% of voters are eternally anti-climate policy, and 10-15% are almost certainly skeptical or not enthusiastic (undecideds), then that leaves only 40-45% of the electorate that potentially, maybe, might care enough to enact something big. 45% does not a large mandate make!
I think America will slowly and surely reduce carbon output through the private sector. Though the US is behind ambitious goals , it’s getting there. The problem is also elsewhere . For the massive coal fired electric generators in western China , I have no answer and strangely enough the journos don’t like to talk about it much either.
Hi
Thanks again for work. Change of Subject: When the war started, I mentioned that in 1941, Von Rundstedt had close to a million Germans & allies attacking basically the same front-from Crimea to the Pripyat Marshes. It was defended by maybe up to a million Russians (NEVER believe any Soviet number from WW2). The initial Russian attacking force this year was only 250,000, now down below 200,000. That's about 4-5 times less than '41-'44. Given that the front in WW2 was never really continuous like the Western Front in WW1, what we have is a very empty battlefield compared to then. At a certain point, this should turn back into a war of movement as the lines are thin and no one has much in the way of reserves, especially the Russians. Based on WW2 experience, if someone knocks a good size hole in the line, it will be difficult to close. For the Ukraine, what defense depth they have are the local militias. They've done ok so far. I have not heard that Russia has organized a similar force. So it would be bad if an Ukrainian force got behind Russian lines. We'll have to see what happens between now & the Fall rains, hopefully in the next 8 weeks.
Stating a problem without a clear plan of action to solve it; 0/10, please see me after class.
What you say about Manchin is true but it elides the question of how many hidden Manchins there are in Congress. They can say they favor Build Back Better now but -- if Manchin were to vanish -- would end up voting against it . The Democratic Party may have a few truly well-meaning members, but I've concluded they serve only as window dressing to obscure the true nature of their party, an institution that is thoroughly corrupt across many levels and through multiple networks of outright bribery and self-dealing. Of course, the Republicans are just as bad.
"It is tempting to say that ultimately the problem in the US is that climate is just not popular enough. But that begs the question. Climate is not an issue that asserts itself simply through the force of facts. It is not the same as pollution or a war. Climate is abstract. To join the dots, to make it salient requires political work. Activists, scientists, the media, a few key politicians have, in fact, done that work in the US and the evidence is that they are gaining ground." Adam Tooze
Me: Only 1% of Americans in a recent NYT/Siena College poll named climate change as the most important issue facing the country. According to an analysis of the poll in the Times, concerns about climate change have taken a back seat amid rising gas prices and economic uncertainty.
Dems focusing on tax cuts to pay for BBB has always been part of the Deficit Myth. We don’t use taxes, at the Federal level, to pay for programs, taxes are there to mop up excess liquidity when inflation is rampant, not as it is now do to supply chain constraints due to COVID and Russia/OPEC. Take the tax and spend meme away from the Conservatives, as it’s all about functional finance that we learned in WWII from JM Keynes and Abba Lerner.
Make the progress by passing good infrastructure and climate programs that are sustainable in the long run and most importantly pass a Federal Job Guarantee (living wage, health care and retirement) for all those that want to work, especially on building sustainable infrastructure structure. Our city streets are terrible because we use oil based asphalt that doesn’t pass the lifecycle cost analysis test
The American Congress can find money for fighting wars, but not for fighting climate change, ending poverty, building infrastructure. So what is the European Union going to do? Are they going to sanction the United States? What is Canada's Justin Trudeau going to do? Is he going to sanction the United States? What is Australia's Anthony Albanese going to do? Is he going to sanction the United States?
If Canada, EU, Australia are true friends, they should have long ago spoken out clearly about United States failures to address the true causes of war and conflict in the world. Shameful!
The insane response to Putin in Ukraine is the end of any meaningful climate legislation. Not only did it ensure that fossil fuel security will be imperiled for years going forward, it also got lawmakers back into the old military pork game. While you guys focus on dead on arrival climate legislation these guys are all getting rich larding up military appropriations. There is a new bill every month and opposing it makes you a commie or a nazi or something...politics is such a great business!
The good news is that the US cant do anything about carbon emissions one way or the other as tooze mentions China dwarfs us...the US is not really a player in terms of this game.
What is the role in all of this of what Jane Mayer called ‘dark money’? Is this due solely to the views of Senators and Representatives or to those (Peter Thiel, the Koch family) who line their pockets?