webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

Green New Deal 3 GND

1021

see BBB

see offshore wind

see alarmist gubmint freedom tyrant regime radical agenda globalist BS // climate lockdown hype gas stove BS

note trump fox pjt 2025 conflates w/ IRA BBB; VOUGHT TARGET BLUE STATE SCAM

---

---

2 26 KILLED ENDANGERMENT

YT MSNBC Trump’s EPA dismantles Obama-era climate change regulations - YouTube

“BIGGEST DEREG IN AM HIST BY FAR”

SO CALLED END FINDING OBAMA ERA; PRICES WENT UP FOR WORSE PRODUCT; NO BASIS IN FACT OR LAW; FF SAVE LIVES; WIND INTERMITTENt MOST COSTLY; DIE NO AC HEATING; RADICal rule --> green new scam mebbe worse than rUSsiaGATE; jobs decimated but coming back bc tariffs; harmed car indist; ford plant wd be closed;

hated start sop feature; ev mandate; had to pay 5 trill$ for pwr stations for ev

car price up 22% biden fo gnscam

#$

CAR START EZIER... DOW

Z HOLY GRAIL OVERREACH; SAVE 1/3 TRILL$; 2400 ON CAR; IDEOL CRUSADE REGU PWR GRAB MOST; TRILLIONS $ STRANGLED, LIMIT CHOICE; LEFTWING WISHLIST EV MANDATE ; abuse? go to church; target am dr; red tape; forced trans to ev; climate partic trOphy = startstop; bureaucrats demand; delivers wins cafe duffy ca; jobs;

restores the rule of law?!

...

TIRED OF PLAYING GAMES; EV NO ONE BOUGHT; WE HEARD YOU AND ACTED; COMMITED TO CLEAN AIR LAND AND WATER FOR ALL HARNESS AM GREATNESS? FREEDOM AND CHOICE, RULE OF LAW CONGR NEVER MADE LAW; NEVER WAVER ON MISSION, GOLDEN AGE OF AM

SPK ONLY OF CAR EMISSION NOT PWR PLANTS?

NO OTHER PREZ WD DO THIS; 1.3 TRILL SAVINGS

VOUGHT

LEE FARM EQUIP JOHN DEER; SMOG NO NEED TO GO TO FINEST SCHOOL TO WORK LAWN MOWER TRMP

WINDMILL ALL MADE IN CHINA GERMANY KILL BIRDS, EYESORE; EUROPE NOT RECOG W/ WIND AND MIGRANTS; MOST EXPENSIVE ENERGY; HOPE NOT 1 BUILT; ENDNGERMENT FOR MILITARY AND AIRLINES

NO ONE DOES MORE FOR HEALTH CARE THAN GOP; DRUG PRICES, BIGGEST EVER

CARS EV NO WORK MULT COMPUTER TO SAVE TINY AMT OF GAS

Trump’s EPA dismantles Obama-era climate change regulations - YouTube

---

---

MMA

Dozens of Project 2025 proposals appear to be included in the Trump administration's newest budget

Budget director Russ Vought was a key author of the extreme right-wing media initiative

Written by Sophie Lawton

Published 04/14/26

The proposed 2027 budget released by the Office of Management and Budget is filled with ideas that appear to be copied and pasted from Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. Russ Vought, the head of the OMB, was an architect of the extreme right-wing media initiative and its signature publication before being hired by President Donald Trump.

The 2027 budget proposes defunding a variety of “woke" policies (with the word “woke” appearing more than 30 times in the document), including, for example, Department of Commerce programs “focused on woke and meaningless initiatives" like prioritizing support and funding for LGBTQ businesses.

Similarly, in Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts’ forward to the Project 2025 Mandate for Leadership, he calls for the next conservative administration to “make the institutions of American civil society hard targets for woke culture warriors" by “deleting the terms sexual orientation and gender identity (‘SOGI’), diversity, equity, and inclusion (‘DEI’), gender, gender equality, gender equity, gender awareness, gender-sensitive, abortion, reproductive health, reproductive rights, and any other term used to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights out of every federal rule, agency regulation, contract, grant, regulation, and piece of legislation that exists."

Other proposals from the 2027 budget go even further than what was suggested by Project 2025. For instance, Project 2025 concedes that Congress is unlikely to defund the Minority Business Development Agency and therefore “a conservative Administration is best served by approaching MBDA as a tool to be leveraged in the fight to deliver economic opportunity to all Americans." The 2027 budget suggests defunding the agency entirely.

Project 2025 calls for a conservative administration to restructure the Teen Pregnancy Prevention initiative so it does not serve as an “advocacy tool” to “promote sex, promote prostitution, or provide a funnel effect for abortion facilities." Trump's 2027 budget proposes completely eliminating the program.

The 2027 budget document also contains some language more forceful than what was seen in Mandate for Leadership, repeatedly referring to the Green New Deal as the “Green New Scam,” for example, while Mandateuses the somewhat softer “green subsidies” to describe environmental and related policies it calls to dismantle.

After spending months disavowing Project 2025 on the campaign trail in 2024, Trump hired dozens of people connected to the effort at the start of his second term and has continued to enact policies lifted directly from the Mandate for Leadership. Some of the more notable Project 2025 suggestions that have been implemented include dismantling the U.S. Agency for International Development and defunding programs related to diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. According to the open source Project 2025 Tracker, the Trump administration has implemented around 50% of Project 2025's policy proposals so far....

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

---

OMFG

MOJO

This story was originally published by theGuardian and is reproduced here as part of the*Climate Desk*collaboration.}:

The Trump administration is breaking up a research center praised as a “crown jewel” of climate research after accusing it of spreading “alarmism” about climate change.

Russell Vought, the director of the White House’s office and management budget, said the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado, would be dismantled under the supervision of the National Science Foundation.

“This facility is one of the largest sources of climate alarmism in the country,” he wrote in a social media post. “A comprehensive review is underway & any vital activities such as weather research will be moved to another entity or location.”

The announcement was the latest in a series of climate-skeptic moves by the administration, which has vowed to eliminate what it calls “green new scam research activities.”

It drew fierce condemnation from climate experts, who said the Colorado center was renowned for advances in the study of weather patterns, including tropical cyclones.

Roger Pielke Jr, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute thinktank, told *USA Today*, which first reported the story, that the facility was “a crown jewel of the US scientific enterprise and deserves to be improved not shuttered.”

He added: “If the US is going to be a global leader in the atmospheric sciences, then it cannot afford to make petty and vindictive decisions based on the hot politics of climate change.”

The move was also criticized by Colorado’s governor, Jared Polis, who said it put “public safety at risk.”

“Climate change is real, but the work of NCAR goes far beyond climate science,” he said. “NCAR delivers data around severe weather events like fires and floods that help our country save lives and property, and prevent devastation for families.”

The center employs approximately 830 staff and includes the Mesa Laboratory in Boulder, which Vought said would be shut. It also operates two aircraft for atmospheric research and manages a government-owned supercomputing facility in Wyoming.

The decision to dismantle it is consistent with Donald Trump’s frequent characterisations of climate change as a “con job” or a “hoax.”

The White House has accused the centre of following a “woke direction” and identified several projects that administration officials say are wasteful and frivolous, USA Today reported.

These include a Rising Voices Center for Indigenous and Earth Sciences that seeks to “make the sciences more welcoming, inclusive, and justice-centered,” as well as research into wind turbines, an innovation that Trump has repeatedly denounced.

The administration has already proposed a 30 percent cut to the funding of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, slashing spending on its climate, weather and ocean laboratories, which work to improve forecasting and better understand weather patterns.

---

---

Right-wing media’s “war on meat” paves the way for Trump administration to blame climate policies for rising beef prices

Special ProgramsClimate & Energy

Written by Ilana Berger

Published 12/18/25

Right-wing media's longstanding claims of a Democratic “war on meat" have given Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins cover to blame rising beef prices on Democrats and climate policy — even as cattle ranchers themselves point to climate-driven drought as one factor contributing to small herd sizes and voice their opposition to the administration’s plans to import Argentine beef.

On December 8, Rollins told Fox Business host Larry Kudlow, “The cost of ground beef is actually coming down, so we’ve started now the trajectory down. But let’s be very clear: To rebuild the lowest beef herd in 75 years … will take a little bit of time. You think about the last administration. They had a war on American agriculture. They thought that cows created climate change. They didn't want big herds, and the cost of inputs were skyrocketing.”

She made similar claims prior to this appearance at least five separate times on Fox Business’ Mornings with Maria, Fox News’ Fox & Friends, and CNN’s The Situation Room.

Right-wing media have long tried to pit ranchers and farmers against environmentalists and those attempting to mitigate the environmental impacts of agriculture, including falsely claiming Democratic leaders and the Inflation Reduction Act (which they often called the “Green New Deal”) would ban meat.

mma

//

  1. ### Right-wing media spun the bad November jobs report as a win for “native-born” workers

12/17/25 4:22 PM EST

  1. ### Fox News contributor blames DEI for shooting deaths at Brown University

12/17/25 12:16 PM EST

  1. ### Fox found its culprit for high grocery prices following Democratic election victories — Joe Biden

12/17/25

---

---

AN 12 25

President Donald Trump and his MAGA allies aren't shy about berating users of green energy, from Democrat-controlled states in the U.S. to countries in the European Union (EU). Trump believes that EU countries need to increase their use of fossil fuels, and he attacked the UK (which left the EU) for using wind energy during a meeting with Prime Minister Keir Starmer.}:

Part of the Trump administration's energy policy involves energy grants to individual U.S. states. And according to the Washington Post, government lawyers admitted, in a December 15 court filing, that the decision to cut energy grants was based on partisanship.

Post reporters Meryl Kornfield and Hannah Natanson, in an article published on December 17, explain, "The Trump Administration acknowledged, in a court filing this week, that a decision to cut energy grants during the government shutdown was influenced by whether the money would go to a state that tended to elect Democrats statewide or nationally. Government lawyers also wrote in the filing that 'consideration of partisan politics is constitutionally permissible, including because it can serve as a proxy for legitimate policy considerations.'"

The "remarkably candid admission" in the filing, according to Kornfield and Natanson, "echoes" Trump's "frequent vows to punish cities and states that he sees as his enemies, from withholding disaster relief for Southern California to targeting blue cities with National Guard troops."

The "admission," the Post reporters add, "could also raise the possibility that federal attorneys might make similar arguments in legal challenges to other unilateral cuts implemented by the (Trump) Administration for blue cities and states."

"A coalition of Minnesota clean energy groups and the city of St. Paul sued the Trump Administration last month in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Energy Department announced it was slashing 321 grants of about $7.5 billion," Kornfield and Natanson report. "The cuts included projects to kick-start the hydrogen industry in California, upgrade the electricity grid serving Indigenous communities in New Mexico and generate new energy mostly from wind and solar in Minnesota. At the time, Trump's budget director, Russell Vought, touted the cuts on X, declaring 'nearly $8 billion in Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left's climate agenda is being canceled' and listed blue states."

Legal experts interviewed by the Post laid out some reasons why they find Trump allies' actions troubling.

Dan Farber, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, told the Post, "It really undermines the idea that you're passing neutral laws that you know are supposed to apply equally to everybody. I find it really startling they would make that concession."

David Super, a law professor at Georgetown University in Washington, DC, told the Post, "I cannot believe that the Supreme Court would want to allow a partisan tit-for-tat to develop with each party pulling grants from its perceived partisan foes, but one can never be entirely certain these days."

*Read Meryl Kornfield and Hannah Natanson's full article for the Washington Post at this link (subscription required).

---

~// WE Daily on Energy: Kevin McCarthy’s promise for a GOP climate agenda

GRIST How the Green New Deal lit a fire under the GOP

Feeling the Heat

How the Green New Deal lit a fire under the GOP

Grist/Amelia Bates

Zoya TeirsteinSenior Staff Writer

Published

Oct 14, 2020

Topic

Climate + Politics

“We should be a little nervous,” U.S. Representative Kevin McCarthy of California said to a room full of his fellow conservatives at a political conference in Georgia last October.

McCarthy had little obvious reason to be on edge — the House minority leader was in the majority that day at the Washington Examiner’s annual political summit at Sea Island, a five-star resort. And for the first 15 minutes of his interview with Examiner reporter David Drucker, McCarthy exuded confidence. Republicans would win back the House in 2020, he promised. “The first number I want you to remember from now until the election: 19,” he said. “There’s only 19 seats for Republicans to win back the majority.”

Then the conversation turned to the subject of climate change, and McCarthy’s tone shifted.

“We’ve got to do something different than we’ve done today,” he said. The GOP’s habit of denying climate change was putting the party at risk of alienating the largest generation of American adults: millennials. “What if we show that we can solve it?” McCarthy suggested.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky stands in front of the current House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California during a 2015 signing ceremony for the Keystone XL Pipeline Approval Act.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky stands in front of the current House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California during a 2015 signing ceremony for the Keystone XL Pipeline Approval Act. MANDEL NGAN / AFP via Getty Images

If that doesn’t sound like something a Republican would say, especially to a room of staunch conservatives, that’s because it generally isn’t. For about three decades now, the party has been the enemy of climate action. The fossil fuel industry, one of the GOP’s most stalwart allies, stocks the party’s campaign coffers with contributions, and Republican policymakers can often be heard spouting denial, skepticism, and misdirection.

But a confluence of factors — in recent months, especially — have contributed to a change of heart among some Republican leaders. Intensifying hurricane and wildfire seasons have helped ground climate forecasts in reality for all Americans, including Republican voters. Polls, which have long shown strong support for climate action on the left, are starting to indicate that climate change is becoming an increasingly important issue for voters across the board. And young Republicans, the demographic McCarthy is most worried about losing, are starting to sound a lot like young Democrats on the issue.

“If President Trump wants to get my vote, he’s going to have to prioritize climate change in a way that he has not done over the past four years,” Benji Backer, the 22-year-old founder of a conservative environmental group called the American Conservation Coalition, said in a recent interview.

Another reason McCarthy felt he had to sound the alarm on climate: the Green New Deal.

In the early months of 2019, some of the same developments that were motivating Republicans to take climate change more seriously also prompted progressive Democrats to coalesce around a bold idea of how to tackle the climate crisis. The Green New Deal, which is still more of an ideological document than a raft of concrete policy proposals, offers a different approach to climate action, one that values equity and transforming the economy as much as emissions reductions. The idea is to transition the U.S. off of fossil fuels and onto renewable sources of energy while simultaneously creating jobs and revitalizing minority and low-income communities.

At first, the GOP treated the ultra-ambitious but costly Green New Deal with giddy derision — going as far as to lampoon it with a right-wing version called the Green Real Deal. The proposal, Republican thinking went, was so far-fetched it could only harm Democrats if it stayed in the political conversation. “I think it is very important for the Democrats to press forward with their Green New Deal,” President Trump tweeted last February, jonesing for a showdown. Representative Mike Simpson of Idaho called the plan “loony.” “Let’s vote on the Green New Deal!” Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is on the record as acknowledging humans’ role in climate change, tweeted enthusiastically. The Senate did end up voting on the resolution. It was defeated 57 to 0, with the vast majority of Democrats refusing to participate in what they called political theater.

Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida speaks during a news conference to announce the “Green Real Deal,” a response to the Green New Deal, in April 2019 in Washington, D.C.

Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida speaks during a news conference to announce the “Green Real Deal,” a response to the Green New Deal, in April 2019 in Washington, D.C. Photo by Zach Gibson / Getty Images

Regardless, the Green New Deal was a hit with Americans. In July 2019, it had a higher approval rating in a survey of adults than a wealth tax, a semi-automatic assault gun ban, and free college tuition. (It polled on par with legalizing marijuana.) The unexpected popularity of the proposal forced Republicans to start coming up with a plan of their own.

“What the Green New Deal did is bring the issue of climate change to greater prominence,” Carlos Curbelo, a Republican climate hawk who lost his House seat in South Florida amid the 2018 Democratic wave, told Grist. “So it became harder for conservatives to ignore the issue.”

In the year and a half since Trump, Simpson, and Graham derided the Green New Deal, each has sought to bolster his climate bona fides.

Trump has attempted to paint himself as an environmentalist (though his environmental rollbacks are deeply unpopular with swing-state voters). Last April, Simpson told a crowd in Idaho — a ruby-red state where he’s in no danger of losing this fall — that “climate change is a reality.” And Graham has publicly highlighted the daylight between himself and Trump on climate. “I would encourage the president to look long and hard at the science and find a solution,” he said.

Average LCV score, two-year moving average

A modest improvement

The League of Conservation Voters (LCV) scores the environmental inclinations of members of Congress using their ratios of pro-environment votes to the total number of key environmental votes each year. Since 2017, House Republicans’ mean LCV score has risen from about 4.9 percent to roughly 11.1 percent. Senate Republicans have moved from 1.2 percent to 15.7 percent. That said, Republicans’ annual LCV scores are still down drastically since their senators hit their high of 46.7 percent in 1987 and House members’ combined score rose to 39.5 percent in 1990.

— Clayton Aldern

They’re not alone. A growing number of Republican politicians are suddenly talking about climate change. Some of them have even introduced climate policy. “The shift has been drastic,” Curbelo said. “A lot of it has been in rhetoric and language, but, of course, those are leading indicators that foretell what can happen in the right-of-center climate movement.”

Republicans (not all, but some) are waking up to the reality that they have something to lose by not talking about rising temperatures — perhaps more than they stand to gain by denying the existence of climate change. But there’s still a lot of distance between acknowledging that warming is happening and proposing a workable solution to the problem — or reaching a consensus with Democrats on a bipartisan path forward.

A few Republican members of Congress have the beginnings of a plan to tackle emissions. Conservative environmental groups, which have been waiting in the wings for the GOP to come around on this issue, have a pile of ambitious proposals ripe for the plucking. And with the right combination of luck, courage, and political momentum, some of those ideas could garner serious Republican support in the next Congress.

This past February, four months after McCarthy attended the conference in Georgia, the minority leader and seven of his allies in the House of Representatives — Garret Graves of Louisiana, Greg Walden of Oregon, Brad Wenstrup of Ohio, David Schweikert of Arizona, David McKinley of West Virginia, Dan Crenshaw of Texas, and Bruce Westerman of Arkansas — introduced an alternative to the Green New Deal composed of four bills.

The centerpiece of the plan is a deceptively simple proposal to plant more trees. Westerman, a former forester, introduced the Trillion Trees Act. The bill directs the U.S. to take a “leadership role” in implementing an existing World Economic Forum initiative to sequester carbon by planting one trillion trees worldwide. (On Tuesday, Trump signed an executive order that will emphasize U.S. support for the initiative by setting up an interagency council dedicated to coordinating the planting of trees domestically.) The Trillion Trees Act also promotes logging as a method of sequestering carbon. The idea is that planting new trees and cutting them down creates a loop that helps fight climate change. But that cycle has faced pushback from environmentalists, Democrats, and climate scientists who say it creates more emissions than it sequesters.

The other proposed legislation in the House Republicans’ plan would establish a carbon capture program at the Department of Energy, expand an existing tax credit for power plants that capture CO2 before it’s emitted, and promote the development and deployment of carbon capture technologies, while ensuring quicker permitting of such projects. They do not set a target date, or interim goals, for slashing emissions. In The New Republic, journalist Kate Aronoff called the plan “a package only a fossil fuel executive could love.” McCarthy says more pieces of the plan are forthcoming.

Republicans haven’t simply advanced ideas from their caucus — they’ve dabbled in bipartisanship as well. Prior to the Republican climate package’s introduction, McKinley, the representative from West Virginia, co-wrote an op-ed in USA Today with his House colleague Kurt Schrader, a Democrat from Oregon, calling climate change “the greatest environmental and energy challenge of our time.” To meet this challenge at scale, they proposed a decade of public and private investment in clean energy and infrastructure. Those investments, they said, could be followed up by new regulatory standards that ensure the U.S. reaches its targets. In their proposal, the federal government would require the use of clean technologies as they become commercially viable, and states would lead the way on setting ambitious emissions targets. It basically flips the Green New Deal’s premise — bold federal spending to combat rising emissions — on its head.

Other members of Congress have advocated for similar solutions. A pair of moderates from each side of the aisle, Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, co-authored an op-ed in the Washington Post last March calling for a plan to address rising temperatures. “There is no question that climate change is real or that human activities are driving much of it,” they wrote, recommending policies that accelerate innovation in energy storage, advanced nuclear energy, and of course carbon capture.

Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Joe Manchin of West Virginia sidebar during a 2019 Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing.

Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Joe Manchin of West Virginia sidebar during a 2019 Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing. Tom Williams / CQ Roll Call

Murkowski would later introduce a bipartisan bill with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat and long-time climate hawk, called the Blue Carbon for Our Planet Act. The proposed legislation seeks to strengthen federal research into the carbon sequestration capacity of the world’s oceans and sets targets for protecting and restoring marine resources.

It’s not the only piece of bipartisan climate legislation introduced on the Hill. The Growing Climate Solutions Act focuses on the role of agriculture in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Senators Mike Braun of Indiana and Lindsey Graham joined two Democrats in June to sponsor the bill, which would make it simpler for farmers to sell carbon credits — generated by adopting green farming practices on their land — on existing carbon trading markets in California and in the Northeast. A motley crew of groups and corporations, including the Environmental Defense Fund, McDonald’s, and Microsoft, endorsed the proposal.

Another bipartisan effort that could meaningfully bring down emissions is the Super Pollutants Act of 2019. It would create a public-private task force with the aim of curtailing short-lived climate pollutants in the atmosphere and reducing leaks from refrigerators, air conditioners, landfills, and other sources of potent greenhouse gases. Senator Susan Collins of Maine, a Republican currently locked in a tough reelection campaign, introduced the bill last summer with Democratic Senator Chris Murphy from Connecticut. Representatives Scott Peters, a California Democrat, and Matt Gaetz, a Florida Republican and Trump loyalist, introduced companion legislation in the House.

While these proposals and the handful of other bipartisan climate-related bills introduced in the 116th Congress show a portion of GOP legislators moving beyond rhetoric on climate, none of those four initiatives — McCarthy’s raft of policies, Murkowski’s blue carbon bill, the Growing Climate Solutions Act, nor the Super Pollutants Act — has made it out of committee, let alone come to a vote in either chamber of Congress. And none of them has a higher than 4 percent chance of passing, according to the policy analytics group Skopos Labs.

Further, with scientists saying that major progress needs to be made on climate within roughly the next decade, there’s an argument that the GOP’s proposals don’t meet the moment. They certainly pale in comparison to the boldness of recent Democratic plans — further evidence that a chasm remains between the two sides on climate.

The Green New Deal may have spurred Republicans to start thinking critically about the greatest threat facing the planet, but it’s also had that effect on Democrats. The idea turned into a litmus test in the Democratic presidential primary. At least half of the 28 candidates voiced support for the proposal (and those who didn’t immediately and full-throatedly endorse it got an earful from youth climate activists). With the Green New Deal setting the terms of the climate debate within the party, candidates tried to one-up each other with increasingly aggressive climate action plans as the field narrowed over the course of 2019.

Donald-McEachin-House-Climate-Crisis-Committee

U.S. Representative Donald McEachin, a Democrat from Virginia, speaks at the June unveiling of the Climate Crisis action plan, which was put together by the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. Stefani Reynolds / Getty Images

The one-upmanship didn’t stop after Joe Biden was the last candidate standing. Over the summer, Democrats on the House Select Climate Crisis Committee put out a 538-page report that aims to get the country to net-zero emissions by 2050 and contains dozens of bold climate solutions (from tidal energy to indigenous forest management techniques). And as the party’s nominee, Biden updated his primary-era climate plan to reflect increasing enthusiasm among voters for bold climate action, especially in response to the economic woes brought on by the coronavirus pandemic. He says he wants to spend $2 trillion on the transition from fossil fuels to renewables if he unseats Trump in November — and in the process create millions of jobs.

The movement from Republicans over the last year or two to play catch-up came just as the other side of the aisle was moving the goal posts. Thus, the distance between the two parties hasn’t meaningfully closed. And that’s a recipe for little lasting climate policy to pass Congress and land on a president’s desk. Trump’s heedless rollbacks of what could end up being the entirety of Obama’s climate legacy is proof of the instability of a climate agenda accomplished primarily via executive order and rulemaking.

There is, however, a possible middle ground between Republicans’ natural innovation-based proposals to pare down emissions and Democrats’ plans to reshape the entire economy, but neither party currently loves it: a carbon tax.

“Almost every economist from left to right agrees it’s the first and most obvious thing to do,” said Bob Inglis, who was one of the first Republican climate hawks in the House and now runs a conservative pro–carbon tax group called RepublicEN. A carbon tax, which basically exists to make the climate costs of burning fossil fuels visible, functions like a “sin tax” on cigarettes or alcohol. It disincentivizes carbon pollution by making it more expensive upfront.

The idea should have broad bipartisan appeal. Carbon taxes drive down emissions and simultaneously generate revenue.

The version Inglis’ group is pushing would either return revenue to consumers in the form of a check every year or apply it toward cutting existing taxes in other areas. A tax is a hard sell no matter what, but one that puts more money in Americans’ pockets should be palatable to the GOP. Other groups have different ideas of what to do with the money. In Washington state, a 2018 ballot measure called Initiative 1631 would have priced carbon starting at $15 per metric ton and put the money toward programs that reduce the effects of emissions and pollution in the state, specifically on marginalized communities. It seemed poised to pass but failed after oil companies poured millions into killing it.

Inglis knows just how politically dicey a carbon tax can be. He lost his 2010 House reelection bid in South Carolina in large part because he acknowledged the reality of warming and introduced a carbon-pricing bill to combat it. The pricing mechanism is as unpopular among elected Republicans today as it was in 2010. Last year, 11 Republican state senators in Oregon literally ran away from the state capitol to avoid having to vote on a measure that would have put a modest price tag on carbon emissions.

LCV score, House and Senate Republicans

Few among many

The increase in average annual Republican League of Conservation Voters (LCV) scores stems from people like Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski in the Senate and Representatives Christopher Smith of New Jersey and Elise Stefanik of New York in the House — as opposed to a general uptick in Republican environmental sentiment. Lifetime LCV scores (as opposed to annual) for GOP legislators continue to decline.

The disconnect between annual and lifetime scores suggests any potential turning of the tide driven by a few relatively climate-friendly Republicans is wiped out by the party’s prevailing anti-environmental stance.

— Clayton Aldern

Inglis’ group isn’t the only outfit advocating for a carbon tax. The Climate Leadership Council, a think tank led by former Republican Secretaries of State James A. Baker III and George P. Shultz, advocates for a revenue-neutral carbon tax that returns the proceeds directly to Americans. Its initiative has been endorsed by Shell, ExxonMobil, and other oil companies. (If that sounds too good to be true, it’s because the plan initially gave oil companies a big break in return for their support: immunity from the wave of climate liability lawsuits sweeping the U.S. right now. The provision was later dropped from the group’s proposal.) The Citizens Climate Lobby, a formidable nonpartisan environmental group, also favors a “revenue-neutral” carbon tax, and it trains volunteers to lobby Congress on the scheme’s virtues.

Despite enthusiasm from outside groups, most GOP members in Congress won’t even entertain the idea. Brian Fitzpatrick and Francis Rooney, representatives from Pennsylvania and Florida, respectively, are the only Republicans who have signed on to any of the 10 carbon pricing initiatives introduced in Congress in the past two years. None of them have gone anywhere. Braun, the senator from Indiana who backed the Growing Climate Solutions Act, recently said he’d be open to a carbon tax, which would have been a pleasant surprise, had he not qualified it with “a year or two down the road.”

But Inglis is hopeful that the GOP will soon come around. “Things move and pendulums swing,” he said, noting that the proposals Republicans like Minority Leader McCarthy have already put forward are a promising first step in the right direction. “Incentives for clean energy, tax expenditures that encourage clean energy innovation, are like a base camp at 5,000 feet on this 15,000-foot mountain that’s called worldwide, economy-wide action on climate change,” he said. “We really need to not stop there.”

Remember back at the political conference in Georgia when McCarthy asked his audience to hold on to the number 19 — as in the 19 House seats needed to flip the chamber red? Well, Inglis is holding out for a different set of numbers: 25 House members and at least 12 senators. That’s how many Republican members of Congress he says are necessary to accomplish bipartisan climate action.

“I’d like to have a total and beautiful conversion experience from my party,” he told Grist. “But if it’s not that, it’s OK. We’ll take the 25 and the 12 to 15 and make climate action bipartisan and durable.”

It’s an optimistic vision of the future, considering Inglis is talking about a Congress that is in a perpetual state of gridlock.

In September, the Democratic House passed a sweeping bill that would create a few of the clean energy research and development programs that many climate-conscious Republicans have been advocating for. The 900-page Clean Energy and Jobs Innovation Act would also establish more stringent building codes and energy efficiency requirements, strengthen existing weatherization programs, and promote carbon capture. It passed 220 to 185.

Seven Republicans voted in favor of the bill, while 166 voted against it. Despite being nervous about climate, McCarthy was in the nay column. Greg Walden, one of the sponsors of the four-bill Republican climate package, put out a statement criticizing the act for being unrealistic and expensive. “This bill is chock-full of government mandates that would raise what Americans pay for everything from the vehicles they drive to what they pay to heat, cool, and power their homes,” he said.

Seven House Republicans aren’t quite the 25 Inglis says are necessary to pass his bipartisanship test. But it’s not entirely impossible for Congress to achieve a consensus on protecting the environment. This summer, Congress passed the Great American Outdoors Act, which permanently allocates $900 million to the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) every year and puts $9.5 billion over five years toward the National Park Services’ nearly $12 billion maintenance backlog. Eighty-one Republicans in the House and 28 Republicans in the Senate voted for it.

The conservation bill passed in large part because Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado, facing a tough reelection battle this fall, took it upon himself to convert his side of the aisle to the cause. He had been trying to get the LWCF reauthorized and funded since 2015 — after all 70 percent of Colorado voters supported fully funding the LWCF — even though the leadership of his own party put pressure on him to drop the issue. Gardner refused to flip.

“There are places in our great land that can and should be enjoyed for generations to come,” he said on the Senate floor in June.

It’s not an egregious stretch of the imagination to think that, someday in the not-too-distant future, a coalition of nervous Republicans might say the same thing about the entire planet and take a stand on climate change.

===

RWW 8 25

...Roberts’ recommendation was part of a ten-point policy agenda he urged the state legislators to adopt. Among his other recommendations:

TIKTOK DISS

...

4.5 Fear of a ‘‘green agenda’’

Another frequent conspiracy theory narrative positions climate policies and green technology

as a means of oppression by a tyrannical elite. I summarize all social, political, economic, and

technological pro-environmental measures as the “green agenda.” This discourse appears to be

most concerned with specific notions of freedom, such as the freedom to drive a gasoline-

powered car or the freedom to eat meat. Believers view pro-environment policies and

technologies as a means of government overreach. This is sometimes incorporated into a

broader conspiratorial belief in which these measures are a set of tools used by a malevolent.

evil group to work toward their goal of world domination. This framework considers LED

lights a tool for spying on civilians, electric cars a means to control people’s mobility, and

carbon footprint calculators a pretense for tracking individuals’ every move.

Many of these videos either directly mentioned or indirectly referred to components of the

“Great Reset” conspiracy, a narrative which emerged from “The Great Reset” initiative, an

economic recovery plan created by the World Economic Forum (WEF) to reduce global

inequality and advance environmental initiatives in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The

“Great Reset” is not so much a singular conspiracy narrative as an umbrella term for a loose

grouping of conspiracy theories, sometimes described as a “conspiracy smoothie” (Klein,

2020). However, the core theme is that Klaus Schwab and the WEF are acting as a

Machiavellian hidden hand, using the pandemic and climate change as an excuse to advance

their interests and potentially implement a tyrannical global regime. While “Great Reset” may

not be explicitly referred to in each of these narratives, it serves as a unifying theme under

which many of these conspiracy narratives exist.

Figure 13: A TikTok user films the sun shining through clouds as evidence of a geoengineering conspiracy.

29

The video depicted in Figure 14 offers an imagined future scenario in which criticizing the

government results in citizens losing access to their electric vehicles. Here, green technology

serves as a support mechanism for an oppressive regime.

The TikTok, which is composed of blocks of text sequentially shown over a cityscape

background and instrumental music, reads:

The year is 2030.

You try to start your electric vehicle but…

you recently questioned the new government mandates.

Your car won’t start for 48hrs.

Your social credit score isn’t high enough now.

The government has frozen your bank account.

You’re no longer the ideal citizen of the new world order.

Your freedoms are now ‘limited.’

Maybe next time… you will just comply.

Look how far complying has gotten you.

If you just comply you will get your freedoms back.

They promised us that after 2 weeks to flatten the curve.

They don’t have any reason to lie to us…. Right?

Figure 14: Great Reset video paints image of a near future in which EVs are a means of punishing civilians for dissent.

30

Several of the videos in the data set were concerned with loss of freedom with regard to eating

meat. In this sense, the green agenda threatens individuals’ perception of choice over the food

they eat. A video of internet personality Andrew Tate also featured a future scenario in which

green policy is used as a means for control. Tate says:

You can’t drive your car past 8 p.m. anymore because of the environment. You can’t

eat meat anymore because of the environment. Stay home. Eat the bugs. Be a slave. Be

a slave. Be a slave.

Another video referred to the conspiracy theory of “climate lockdowns,” a narrative which

emerged in response to COVID-19 lockdowns. According to this conspiracy theory,

governments will implement further lockdowns, supposedly to reduce greenhouse gas

emissions.

If the whole pandemic narrative is not what some of the evil powers that be are looking

for it to become, they will begin to cause ... and I'm going to say this again ... I've been

saying this for months, but there's going to be climate change. Now this sounds wild,

but listen to me ... lockdowns. You're going to see some of this begin to unfold, and you

say "climate change lockdowns?" Yep, I think that they'll begin to say all the urgency

Figure 15: Internet personality Andrew Tate claims that "You can't eat meat anymore because of the environment."

31

of the greenhouse gases and all the things that are happening are so severe that we

need to do this for the good of humanity.

While this genre of climate change conspiracy theory does not overtly deny the existence of

climate change, it considers climate policy to be a veiled attempt to implement oppressive

governmental regimes.

4.6 Supply control

Another prominent theme within this data set was an anxiety surrounding access to basic needs

like food, water, and electricity. This discourse featured food shortages, water shortages, and

power outages. Rather than depicting these problems as the results of a global market impacted

by climate, politics, economics, or technologies, this discourse considers these events

intentional. They are viewed as a means through which the powerful elite attempt to exert

control over the populace. These conspiracy theories offer alternative explanations for

ramifications of climate interacting with societY...

---

MMA 4 25

April 22, 2025, edition of Fox News' Hannity

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): Make no mistake, at the end of the day, this has nothing to do with the Earth cooling, global warming, which has evolved into the generic climate change, so if it gets warm, they have a name for it. If it gets cold, they have a name for it. If it snows, they've got a name for it. If it doesn't snow, they have a name for it.

Look at this list. It's the Green New Deal. Look, everything on this list has nothing to do really with climate. Climate warming, climate cooling, climate changing is the left's mechanism for Marxism, statism as represented by that list, to each according to their need, from each according to their ability. The only thing Democrats really care actually is political power and you being dependent on them.

---

===

Biden 'doubling down' in the face of 'absurdity' with latest climate push, expert says

Fox Business

Climate Depot executive editor Marc Morano reacts to comments from a Senate hearing on climate concerns and sounds off on the Biden ...

december 19, 2024

foghorn

Biden ‘doubling down’ in the face of ‘absurdity’ with latest climate push, expert says

Climate Depot executive editor Marc Morano reacts to comments from a Senate hearing on climate concerns and sounds off on the Biden administration's latest climate push on 'The Bottom Line.'

nyt ben keys}:

ditch home; extremiest arent you? cli hypoc on blast hdline; cli obsession ethos; expose absurdity; wharton prof; un says exteme wether not increasing; own hse in flood zone; nyt long hist gone aftr home racism, cli emergency, houses more dang to cli than cars; doing all the things they tell us not to do giant homes oprah

kerry pvt jet and ---?]

lame duck joe pedal to metal on his cli agenda; new emission targets; cuts GG 60 percent by 2035; gum up sys w new regs; very easy to undo; climate agenda hates us hates am way, 2x down in face of ... magical thinking paperwork climate agenda get us out of paris treaty by going to congress; woman: fear based agenda, requires their intervention; misnamed IRA is really the grn new deal; get rid of epa endangerment finding; day 1 reverse agancy pentagon abolish every climate agy and goal do fast and rapid, do in 2 wks

dr_benjamin_jkeystestimonysenatebudgetcommittee

Testimony of Benjamin J. Keys, Ph.D. Rowan Family Foundation Professor, Professor of Real Estate and Finance,

The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania Hearing

on “Next to the Fall: The Climate-Driven Insurance Crisis is Here – And Getting Worse”

---

see clay clark prophet

Two pro-Trump officials pushed conspiracy theory that Hurricane Helene was done through weather “manipulation”

Georgia GOP official Kandiss Taylor also alleged that Helene was created or manipulated “to keep Mark Robinson from that governorship”

Written by Eric Hananoki

Published 10/08/24 mma

Far-right commentators Kandiss Taylor and Lucretia Hughes, respectively officials for the Georgia Republican Party and pro-Trump group Veterans for America First, pushed fringe conspiracy theories about Hurricane Helene, including claiming that it “could have been done by the government” through weather “manipulation” and as a “land grab” to steal lithium.

On her podcast, Taylor also claimed that the hurricane was created or manipulated “to keep Mark Robinson from that governorship because he understands … the Constitution” and that “terrifies every single establishment politician in this country.”

Numerous conspiracy theories have circulated about Hurricane Helene and have included claims that the government somehow created or manipulated the hurricane through weather modification or weather control. (Media Matters reported yesterday that Clay Clark, a Trump event organizer and close friend of Eric Trump, also pushed the “weather manipulation” conspiracy theory.)

Taylor is the elected District 1 chairwoman of the Georgia Republican Party, a “key” post in the state. She has met with former President Donald Trump and is helping his election efforts in Georgia.

Taylor has a history of making antisemitic remarks: She complained that Jewish people are “controlling everything” and alleged that “we have some Marxist trash using our R who pander to the Jews.”

Hughes is a national ambassador for Veterans for America First, a right-wing group that’s supporting Trump. The group recently said that Hughes will “speak with President Trump” at an upcoming event. The Trump campaign has touted her endorsement and listed her as part of its Gun Owners for Trump coalition. Turning Point USA, a key Trump campaign ally, also lists Hughes as one of its “activist partners.”

The two appeared on Taylor’s October 5 program, where they promoted conspiracy theories about Hurricane Helene. (Taylor’s show airs on the Stew Peters Network, an outlet led by Hitler-praising Holocaust denier and Taylor’s “best friend” Stew Peters.)

Hughes began by calling the hurricane “a land grab,” saying, “I'm so angry with all of this. This is not the United States that I grew up in. This is the United States that has gotten into bed with the global society, trying to rip us off for our sovereignty and get illegal land grabs at the same dang old time.” Taylor responded by stating: “Yeah, lithium specifically. I'm so disgusted with North Carolina and what's going on there.”

Taylor later said that the hurricane “could have been done by the government if they'd been doing the weather manipulation, which we know there were acts passed. There's been things printed and done in the legislation for weather modification. So how do we know, how do we know that all their manipulation didn't cause this?”

The government has not controlled Hurricane Helene through weather manipulation and has not attempted to steal lithium from North Carolina through this tragedy.

Further into the program, Taylor bizarrely claimed that “the whole thing in North Carolina” was somehow done “to keep Mark Robinson from that governorship.”

Video

CitationFrom the October 5, 2024, edition of Jesus. Guns. And Babies

KANDISS TAYLOR (HOST): I really did think about this, Lucretia. Like the whole thing with North Carolina, I know though it’s a grab for the land — land grab and they want the lithium. But I also believe they don't want the voters turning out that are all around Asheville. Those Republican, red voters. They didn't, they are trying their best to keep Mark Robinson from that governorship because he understands — oh, I feel the Holy Spirit — he understands the Constitution. He understands state sovereignty. He understands we are the United States of America. And as a state, we're sovereign. As a state, we should be able to function on our own. As a state, we can push back. We're joined because we choose to be. But a state has sovereignty, and Mark understands that. And it terrifies every single establishment politician in this country.

Toward the end of the show, Hughes added to the weather manipulation subject by stating:

LUCRETIA HUGHES: That's so scary, to know they can manipulate our weather. To know they have the equipment and the satellite images and the satellite stuff to do it. To know that 5G is a real thing. Knowing that HAARP antennas is literally up there in the Arctic right now. I don't understand how people not know when you can type in seeding a cloud, or rain cloud machines, and there are video after video of them turning on a big old machine. And it's huge. And next thing you know, smoke just start coming out this machine and it spits clouds, spits clouds. And they keep it on for about one or two hours and all of it just goes up in the air. He said about, he said, “I give it a day. It’s going to be two states over.” The United States has patents in the patent office for them been doing this for decades now. Decades, y'all. This ain't new.

Taylor replied by saying, “It’s not new, and we're just learning about it because they didn't want us to know about it.”

===

Fox News panel slams the Inflation Reduction Act with data that’s 2 years out of date

09/06/24 mma

Fox News panel slams the Inflation Reduction Act with data that’s 2 years out of date

Perhaps the team at Fox simply forgot what year it is?

Written by Craig Harrington

Research contributions from Zachary Pleat

Published 09/06/24

All five of the co-hosts of Fox News’ midday program Outnumbered got in on the action Friday of taking shots at one of the Biden-Harris administration’s signature legislative accomplishments: the Inflation Reduction Act.

In their criticisms of the law they seemed completely unaware of the dramatic reduction of inflation that has occurred over the past two years, and they dishonestly characterized the bill as a sort of Trojan horse for major climate legislation.

On the September 6 edition of Fox News’ Outnumbered, co-host and former Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany introduced the segment by slamming President Joe Biden for “admitting” that the Inflation Reduction Act “wasn't about inflation; it was really about his climate agenda.”

As the segment progressed, all of the co-hosts took turns deriding the “Inflation Explosion Act” for supposedly resulting in increased inflation and mocking President Joe Biden for his purported recent admission that the IRA was actually just a version of the Green New Deal.

Fox News’ production team also paired the segment with a misleading on-screen graphic criticizing Biden for annualized inflation rising from 1.4% before he took office to 9.1% in June 2022.

Video

CitationFrom the September 6, 2024, edition of Fox News' Outnumbered

Both of Fox’s lines of attack are deeply misleading.

First, the Inflation Reduction Act is not simply a rebrand of the Green New Deal. Fox has been lying about this for years, and it has never been true.

The Biden administration has also not been secretive about the historic climate provisions included in the bill. As the bill was being negotiated in July 2022, The Washington Post touted that its provisions included “the nation’s biggest-ever climate bill.” CNN likewise described the law as “the largest climate investment in US history, and by far the biggest legislative win for the environmental movement since the Clean Air Act.” Last August, the White House marked the first anniversary of the passage of the IRA by releasing a fact sheet boasting that the IRA “is the most ambitious investment in combating the climate crisis in world history.”

Second, the inflationary peak the Fox personalities claimed to be so upset about occurred more than two years ago. The Inflation Reduction Act was negotiated in Congress and enacted into law amid that inflationary peak.

The IRA was enacted in August 2022 and, since it went into effect, all traditional measurements of inflation have improved considerably –– a fact McEnany glossed over.

Fox viewers were shown this graphic, which included only January 2021 (when the economy was still largely dampened by COVID) and June 2022 (peak of inflation). Fox could have easily shown its viewers more recent data, demonstrating that inflation has been stable for over a year and is now only slightly higher than pre-pandemic levels:

Fox personality Lisa Kennedy Montgomery slammed the administration, saying that working families “haven’t gotten a raise” and that the price of eggs has risen to “$10 a dozen,” but those statements are simply false.

In reality, average hourly wages are up, wage growth has outpaced inflation since May 2023, and the average egg price is $3 per dozen nationwide. Even with inflation, an analysis from the Center for American Progress shows that wage increases had surpassed price increases by November 2023.

related

  1. ### New inflation report showed “amazing” improvement. Fox News trashed it anyway.

07/11/24 4:31 PM EDT

  1. ### Fox & Friends calls inflation report that was in line with expectations a “nasty report”

05/15/24 1:53 PM EDT

  1. ### News headlines turn a good inflation report into a bad one by focusing on missed expectations

02/13/24 4:34 PM EST

  1. ### Fox continues to mislead about grocery inflation

04/11/24 2:04 PM EDT

  1. ### Media outlets are blaring about nonexistent “stagflation.” Economic experts say they’re wrong.

05/01/24 9:21 AM EDT

  1. ### Newspapers largely failed to report Trump's inflationary policies, and economists have taken it upon themselves to warn the public

06/27/24

===

===

Project 2025, right-wing media, and Trump zero in on dismantling the Inflation Reduction Act

Special ProgramsClimate & Energy

Written by Ilana Berger

Published 08/29/24 mma

While the Trump campaign has sought to distance itself from the widely unpopular project, both the former president and his running mate JD Vance have extensive ties to it. And although Project 2025 architect Paul Dans resigned from his position at The Heritage Foundation in July, the Trump campaign’s rhetoric on the Inflation Reduction Act appears to align with that of Project 2025, as laid out in an over 900-page policy book called Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise.

Project 2025 chapter author Bernard McNamee and Trump have both suggested that renewable energy doesn’t work. During an exclusive interview with Fox host Jesse Watters, Trump said, “The whole world is going woke, their world is going woke. The Green New Scam, we’re spending all our money on things that don’t work.” In Mandate, McNamee calls renewable energy unreliable, backing his statement with an endnote that includes no citation and falsely claims that “the challenges to the grid are coming mainly from subsidized renewable resources.” Meanwhile, most power outages are triggered by severe weather. |}:

Renewable energy is particularly resilient because it is modular, and can adapt more easily even if one component of a system is damaged. McNamee also argues that “electric reliability is decreasing in many parts of the country,” citing “the blackouts and shortages in California (August 2020, summer 2022) and Texas (February 2021, summer 2022)” in an endnote. In reality, widespread blackouts and shortages did not occur in California or Texas in 2022, and a multitude of factors caused the blackouts in 2020 and 2021. Fox News, *Fox & Friends*, [7/22/24; Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, 2023; Climate Central, 4/24/24; Media Matters, 2/19/21; Utility Dive, 11/22/22; ABC News, 9/9/22; Natural Resources Defense Council, 9/12/22, 3/3/21]

Like the architects of Project 2025, Trump has publicly opposed equity-related initiatives throughout the federal government, which would seemingly include billions in IRA funding dedicated to helping underserved communities. McNamee writes: “The next Administration should stop using energy policy to advance politicized social agendas. Programs that sound innocuous, such as ‘energy justice,’ Justice40, and DEI, can be transformed to promote politicized agendas.” Trump has also attacked equity-focused programs, writing on Truth Social in 2023 after Biden signed an executive order focused on advancing racial equity, “It is time to eradicate Joe Biden's sinister ‘equity’ Executive Order that has led to the woke takeover of the U.S. Government!” These statements lay bare the threats to initiatives and programs like the $3 billion Environmental and Climate Justice Grant program, a product of the IRA that aims to reduce the impacts of climate change and pollution in low-income communities. Project 2025, *Mandate for Leadership*, [2023; Newsweek 3/2/23; United States Environmental Protection Agency, accessed 8/16/24]|}:

===

---

11 23

WASHINGTON— The Biden-Harris administration today announced its approval of the Empire Wind offshore wind project – the sixth approval of a commercial-scale offshore wind energy project under President Biden’s leadership. Today’s announcement supports the Administration’s goal of deploying 30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy capacity by 2030.

Empire Wind US LLC proposes to develop two offshore wind facilities, known as Empire Wind 1 and Empire Wind 2. The lease area is located about 12 nautical miles (nm) south of Long Island, N.Y., and about 16.9 nm east of Long Branch, N.J. Together these projects would have up to 147 wind turbines with a total capacity of 2,076 megawatts of clean, renewable energy that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) estimates could power more than 700,000 homes each year. The projects would support over 830 jobs each year during the construction phase and about 300 jobs annually during the operations phase.

“Under President Biden’s leadership, the American offshore wind industry is continuing to expand rapidly — creating good-paying union jobs across the manufacturing, shipbuilding and construction sectors," saidSecretary Deb Haaland. “Today’s approval of the sixth offshore wind project adds to the significant progress towards our Administration’s clean energy goals. Together with the labor community, industry, Tribes, and partners from coast to coast, we will continue to expand clean energy development in a manner that will benefit communities, strengthen our nation’s energy security, and address climate change.”

“BOEM and our partners have already achieved so much in pursuit of the Administration’s goal of reaching 30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy capacity by 2030,” saidBOEM Director Elizabeth Klein.“Extensive engagement with Tribes, other government partners, ocean users, concerned citizens, and more has helped us to avoid or reduce user conflicts while facilitating the responsible development of offshore wind projects. We look forward to continuing our work with them as we move this industry forward.”

Bidenomics and the President’s Investing in America agenda are growing the American economy from the middle out and bottom up – from rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure, to driving over half a trillion dollars in new private sector manufacturing and clean energy investments in the United States, to creating good-paying jobs and building a clean energy economy that will combat the climate crisis and make our communities more resilient.

Since the start of the Biden-Harris administration, the Department of the Interior has approved the nation's first six commercial-scale offshore wind energy projects. BOEM has held four offshore wind lease auctions, which have brought in almost $5.5 billion in high bids, including a record-breaking sale offshore New York and New Jersey and the first-ever sales offshore the Pacific and Gulf of Mexico coasts. BOEM has also advanced the process to explore additional opportunities for offshore wind energy development in the U.S., including in the Gulf of Maine and offshore Oregon and the U.S. Central Atlantic coast. The Department has also taken steps to evolve its approach to offshore wind to drive towards union-built projects and a domestic-based supply chain.

Invaluable feedback was gathered through nation-to-nation consultations with Tribes, input from federal, state and local agencies, and from public meetings and comments in analyzing the project’s potential environmental impacts and developing possible alternatives and mitigation measures.

The Record of Decision includes measures aimed at avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating the potential impacts that may result from the construction and operation of the project. Among those measures, Empire Wind, LLC has committed to establishing fishery mitigation funds to compensate commercial and for-hire recreational fishers for any losses directly arising from the project.

The Record of Decision will be published in the Federal Registerin the coming days and can be found on the BOEM website.

---

---

morano gmail 1123 -->

no lnxvid

The slow demise of green energy?

The wheels are starting to fall off the green energy bandwagon

By Kristen Walker Fox News

:{Published November 21, 2023

Facebook

Twitter

Flipboard

Comments

Print

Email

Marc Morano: Biden's green energy agenda is in complete collapse

'The Green Fraud' author Marc Morano joins 'Jesse Watters Primetime' to discuss the collapsing green industry.

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=6340327348112&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="https://www.foxnews.com">foxnews.com</a></noscript>

jesse

OIL IS GREAT, MINERAL RUN OUT, BIGGEST BAILOUT IN HISTORY

arnold S global warming solutionsact virtue signal, subsidies.... 2def 1.5 price is rightgame show

mandates,tax credits, germany bailout offshore wind, 1...trillion transition

how arrogantto think change world economy

cfact protest alliance of fisher]man trans rts activists and ---

50 govsand NJ ~ offshore wind

before to save world have to save ppl 1st

NEW

You can now listen to Fox News articles!

BeyondWords

The wheels are starting to fall off the green energy bandwagon. The rose-colored glasses are clearing up and reality is sinking in. AND OTHER TRITE EXPRESSIONS

The giant push toward a net zero utopia is not practical and has been a complete disservice to the American consumer. Components of the green movement are experiencing major setbacks, namely offshore wind, electric vehicles (EVs), and investments.

Offshore wind projects are struggling to secure financing and stay on track. The biggest blow came last month, when the world’s largest offshore wind developer Ørsted canceled two major projects off the New Jersey coastline, taking the wind right out of Gov. Phil Murphy’s green energy sails. Ørsted is also suspending work on offshore projects in Maryland and Delaware.

President Biden previously set a goal of ensuring 50% of car purchases are electric by 2030. The White House said EPAs recent tailpipe rules would provide a "clear pathway for a continued rise in EV sales."

The EV market is also losing steam. Sales are slumping and manufacturers are scaling back on production. (Anna Moneymaker/Pool/Getty Images | Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

Among the wave of cancellations are projects in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York and Connecticut. Several other projects are on the ropes and a host of companies are paying millions to break their contracts.

BIDEN ADMIN QUIETLY RELEASED STUDY SHOWING GREEN ENERGY RECEIVES FAR MORE SUBSIDIES THAN FOSSIL FUELS

The industry hit another snag recently when Germany-based Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy pulled the plug on its wind turbine blade facility in Portsmouth, Virginia. Siemens Gamesa, one of the world’s leading suppliers, says, "development milestones to establish the facility could not be met."

According to BloombergNEF, at least half of U.S. wind contracts have or are at risk of being terminated. The causes are typically due to skyrocketing inflation, high interest rates, choked supply chains and financial troubles.

Offshore wind is leaving a ‘heavy environmental footprint’ on the East Coast: CFACT’s Craig RuckerVideo

Offshore wind is costly and difficult to implement.

The EV market is also losing steam. Sales are slumping and manufacturers are scaling back on production.

EXPERT WARNS GREEN ENERGY PROJECTS ‘ARE NOT WORTH IT’ AS PRICES SPIRAL ‘OUT OF CONTROL’

Ford Motor Company stands to lose $4.5 billion on its EV business for 2023 and will be delaying many of their EV investments.

General Motors said it was restructuring EV goals, Honda shelved plans to develop affordable EVs with GM, and Hertz said it will slow their rate of purchasing them due to high repair costs. Elon Musk is even considering putting off plans for a $1 billion plant in Mexico.

Nobody wins in this push for electric vehicles besides China: Lisa BootheVideo

Most, if not all, manufacturers are reporting major losses per EV sold. Ford lost $62,000 per vehicle in the third quarter; one luxury electric vehicle company lost an astounding $430,000. Countless others are losing tens of thousands of dollars per vehicle, quarter after quarter.

Car dealers are slashing EV prices. EVs sit on lots nearly twice as long as internal combustion engines. Even industry-leader Tesla has been shaving thousands off their retail prices due to unmet sales expectations.

This kind of loss is not sustainable for any company.

EV MARKET COULD BECOME THE ‘NEXT BIG FLOP’: ECONOMIST

President Biden pushes electric vehicles despite high pricesVideo

The EV market is niche. Those who want one have one. But the rest of America is not convinced they would be better off with an EV on account of a multitude of reliability factors. Nor can they afford the steep price tag.

Consequently, the last few months have seen stock prices drastically dropping in companies across the green spectrum. From wind to solar to EVs to fuel cells, investors are abandoning the "green" energy ship in droves. It might be sinking.

Siemens Energy stock is down 45%; Ørsted, 67%; Power Inc., a hydrogen fuel cell producer, 71%; Charge Point Holdings Inc., an EV charging company, 70%; Blink Charging Co., another EV charging company, 72%; and Nikola Corp., maker of heavy-duty EVs, has gone from $65 a share in mid-2020 to the current price of less than $1 per share.

Green energy agenda is ‘environmental nightmare’: Michael ShellenbergerVideo

A recent Wall Street Journal article noted that such companies are "finding it more difficult to secure financing than at any time in the past decade."

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

We need to read between the lines here. The green energy revolution is not working, nor is central planning. You cannot force Americans to buy cars they don’t want any more than you can force energy transitions that aren’t viable.

Green energy is wholly inadequate to meet the needs of all Americans, and turns out, is insanely expensive.

Doug Burgum: Green New Deal spending is buried in Biden's 'Inflation Creation Act'Video

The World Economic Forum says that getting to net zero by 2050 will cost an extra $3.5 trillion a year. The U.S. has already poured hundreds of billions into the effort and continues to keep shoveling. All on the backs of the American taxpayer, to save a mere fraction of temperature. Maybe.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Heritage Foundation’s chief statistician estimates that even if all fossil fuels were eliminated from the United States, not even 0.2 degrees Celsius would be salvaged.

It’s time to quit throwing other people’s money into these projects and let the market dictate the solutions.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM KRISTEN WALKER

Kristen Walker is a policy analyst for the American Consumer Institute, a nonprofit education and research organization. For more information about the Institute, visit www.theamericanconsumer.org or follow us on Twitter @ConsumerPal.

LNX

The wheels are starting to fall off the green energy bandwagon. The rose-colored glasses are clearing up and reality is sinking in.

The giant push toward a net zero utopia is not practical and has been a complete disservice to the American consumer. Components of the green movement are experiencing major setbacks, namely offshore wind, electric vehicles (EVs), and investments.

Offshore wind projects are struggling to secure financing and stay on track. The biggest blow came last month, when the world’s largest offshore wind developer Ørsted canceled two major projects

BIDEN ADMIN QUIETLY RELEASED STUDY SHOWING GREEN ENERGY RECEIVES FAR MORE SUBSIDIES THAN FOSSIL FUELS

The EV market is also losing steam. Sales are slumping and manufacturers are scaling back on production.

EXPERT WARNS GREEN ENERGY PROJECTS ‘ARE NOT WORTH IT’ AS PRICES SPIRAL ‘OUT OF CONTROL’

EV MARKET COULD BECOME THE ‘NEXT BIG FLOP’: ECONOMIST

We need to read between the lines here. The green energy revolution is not working, nor is central planning. You cannot force Americans to buy cars they don’t want any more than you can force energy transitions that aren’t viable.

The World Economic Forum says that getting to net zero by 2050 will cost an extra $3.5 trillion a year. The U.S. has already poured hundreds of billions into the effort and continues to keep shoveling. All on the backs of the American taxpayer, to save a mere fraction of temperature. Maybe.

*www.theamericanconsumer.org

---

7 23 badash an

florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis says if elected president his plan to address climate change will be to throw out President Joe Biden’s Green New Deal.

Last week on Monday planet Earth suffered the hottest day on record, a record that it broke on Tuesday.

Fox News Business’ Stuart Varney, who has attacked climate change activists as “juvenile” and declared it is “ridiculous” that “the western world is obsessed with climate change,” on Monday asked DeSantis if he has a plan to address the climate crisis.

“The headlines are just full of stories about wildfires smoke, extraordinary temperatures in the southwest and the Southeast to some degree. Do you have a climate plan?” Varney asked.

READ MORE: ‘We Are Now Formally Back on Indictment Watch’ With Trump Georgia Grand Jury: Former Federal Prosecutor

“It’s going to be to rip up Joe Biden’s Green New Deal,” DeSantis bragged. “I think at the end of the day, we need to embrace American domestic energy. This could be a huge source of national security, economic vitality can build our industrial base in Florida.”

DeSantis’ claim echoes **Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy**‘s, who last Thursday said God has blessed America with largenatural gas resources, and the United States should use them to make two of the world’s largest countries and largest economies, China and India, “dependent on American natural gas.” He suggested doing so would “make us economically stronger but geopolitically the world safer,” while falsely claiming it would make the world “environmentally sound.”

The Florida governor bragged to Varney about Florida’s reduction in emissions, which happened, he admitted, through “market forces."

"We’ve actually had a huge reduction in emissions but it was done through innovation,” DeSantis said. “It was done through market forces, not command and control. So we’ll go about that in a much different direction than, than Joe Biden, I think ultimately, Biden’s policies andBidenomics is really about making the average person poor and reducing their standard of living. That is not the way you go about it.”

READ MORE: ‘Keeps on Chugging’: Unemployment Down and Wages Up in ‘Strong’ and Record-Setting June Jobs Report

Last year, a Tampa Bay Times opinion piece noted, “2018, the last year for which [emissions] data is available, Florida utilities had decreased emissions by 19%, the research shows, while tailpipe emissions grew 12%.”

DeSantis was sworn into office in 2019.

Also last year, the Miami Herald warned Florida was not addressing the causes of climate change.

“The last time the Legislature addressed the root cause of climate change — greenhouse gas emissions — it was in a law that effectively blocked cities from cutting emissions,” the paper reported.

Watch DeSantis below or at this link.

FF CEO:

andy biggs  az 27K energy $; appeasement  irrational question, villify, badger, beat the crap for pol resasons shame, attack am workers and pvt sector, increase inflation; thxgiving wallop wallet; regulate you out of biz tomorrow if they cd no matter what you do, lay fdn to get tid of you, hypocrisy of admin; OPEC shd increase output; stip fed lease; nordstream  tax and spend bbb gas price 7 yr high socialist policy GND ~ nukes, ex Cos chaknavardi sp; demise 100K lost jobs, impoverished state oil lease ... art'ls reuter oct 7... putin leverage NYT...

an 9 22

United States Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) revealed to Real America's Voice talk show host Steve Bannon on Monday that she has drafted articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden over his investments in renewable energy.

"Because they're driving theGreen New Deal which is going to plunge America into darknessand that will lead to death and all kinds of issues across America. We simply cannot exist on solar and wind energy at this time. The technology is not there and there's no reason to destroy fossil fuels," Greene said of the Inflation Reduction Act on War Room With Steve Bannon.

"And because of that, Steve, it's such a dangerous threat. No president should be doing that," Greene continued. "I have articles prepared on Joe Biden and we're looking at introducing those possible as early as this week."

READ MORE: [Marjorie Taylor Greene says the Navy will be 'force fed' bugs and Krabby Patties

Yale University explained last December why such claims are false.

"In reality, it is entirely possible to sustain a reliable electricity system based on renewable energy sources plus a combination of other means, including improved methods of energy management and storage," Yale wrote in its report. "A clearer understanding of how to dependably manage electricity supply is vital because climate threats require a rapid shift to renewable sources like solar and wind power."

Watch below or at this link.

7 22

United States Senate candidate Herschel Walker (R-Georgia) recently gave a speech at the Hall County Republican Party Independence Day Picnic in which he fired off a series of oversimplified claims about climate change.

"Get rid of the pipeline, get rid of the energy, starts your downfall, because we need energy for everything, do y'all know that?" Walker said. "And they would talk about theGreen New Deal, you know climate change. I’m gonna help ya’ll with that real quickly, and I'm gonna do it in the Wrightsville way so you can understand what I'm saying."

Walker then suggested that foreign powers, rather than corporate polluters, are primarily responsible for poisoning American skies and waterways. While that does have some validity, it nonetheless dismisses the damage being done by domestic sources. To Walker's credit, however, it was a tiny break away from the GOP's broader stance that climate change is either grossly overblown or nonexistent.

READ MORE: 'Pathological liar' Herschel Walker is a 'campaign's worst nightmare': report

“We in America have some of the cleanest air, the cleanest water of anybody in the world,” Walker said to cheers from the crowd. "So what we're gonna do is we're gonna put from the Green New Deal millions or billions of dollars cleaning our good air up. So all of a sudden, China and India ain't put nothing in their – cleaning that situation up."

Walker added that "since we don’t control the air our good air decided to float over to China’s bad air so when China gets our good air, their bad air got to move. So it moves over to our good air space. Then now we got we to clean that back up."

Watch below via Mediaite:

https://www.mediamatters.org/climate-deniers/fox-news-dominated-coverage-congressional-hearing-big-oil-and-gas-prices

no lnx vid grf

Fox News dominated coverage of congressional hearing on Big Oil and gas prices

Fox’s Big Oil hearing coverage was more than triple CNN’s and MSNBC’s coverage combined

CLIMATE & ENERGY

WRITTEN BY ALLISON FISHER

PUBLISHED 04/08/22

Since last year, Fox News has been trying to pin the blame of rising fuel costs on President Joe Biden through its relentless coverage. The April 6 congressional hearing — by the House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee — on the oil industry’s role in driving record high gas prices and earning record profits posed a threat to that right-wing media narrative. 

:{

}:

In response, Fox News programs devoted 49 minutes of coverage to the hearing, much of which defended Big Oil and insisted that Biden’s policies are responsible for high gas prices. In comparison, CNN and MSNBC covered the hearings for only 10 minutes and 4 minutes, respectively, effectively letting Fox shape the narrative around this moment and failing to use it as a catalyst to inform viewers on the myriad factors that are driving the price at the pump.

Fox covered Big Oil hearing for over three times as long as CNN and MSNBC combined

Fox leveraged the Big Oil hearing to defend the industry and redirect blame at Biden

:{

}:

On April 6, nearly every hour on Fox News — from 4 a.m. to 7 p.m. EDT — featured coverage of the congressional hearing on the oil industry and gas prices. The vast majority of this coverage ran cover for the industry while shoring up one of the network’s most dominant narratives around gas prices — that Biden is to blame.

The claim is false; presidents and their policies have little effect on the price at the pump in the short term and even less impact on how gas is priced in the global market. It also ignores the fact that prices have been rebounding since economies across the globe began reopening from the COVID-19 lockdowns last year. But that hasn’t stopped Fox News from repeatedly tethering gas price hikes to Biden’s policies.

Fox’s coverage of the hearing started with the network’s early morning program,Fox & Friends First. Fox Business correspondent Cheryl Caseonereported on the hearing and cited “misguided policies from the administration” as the key drivers of inflation and high energy cost. Other segments throughout the day highlighted industry talking points, including the claim that “rhetoric from the Biden administration” has had a “chilling effect” on oil production. Anchor Martha MacCullum began her coverage of the Big Oil hearing on The Story with Martha MacCullum by highlighting the findings of a recent Fox poll (a self-fulfilling prophecy) that “Republicans and 68% of registered voters say that the Biden administration is to blame for high prices at the pump.”

Video From the April 6, 2022, episode of Fox News' The Story with Martha MacCallum

In defense of oil companies, Fox host and guests, which included oil industry executives, suggested they were a scapegoat for Biden’s failed policies. Appearing on America’s Newsroom, American Petroleum Institute CEO Mike Sommers said:

“We all know that the real reasonfor high prices are a consequence of low production because of some of these Biden administration policies, but also some other factors that are going on throughout the world. So — but this is a typical blame game we see all the time on Capitol Hill. It is pretty outrageous, though, that they're hauling American executives that supply 11 million American jobs up before Congress to blame them for something that they themselves can be blamed for.”

Similarly, Dan Eberhart, another oil industry CEO, appeared on America Reports and called the hearing a “big show trial.”[anti-commie]

Earlier in the program congressional correspondent Chad Pergram began his report by saying: “Democrats who control the House, Senate, and White House are struggling to address the price surge, so they need a scapegoat. Oil companies. Attacking big business is good politics for the Democratic base.They tried to focus on profits and turned on the witnesses.”

In reality, the industry’s record profits and related decisions to not increase production at a time consumers are hurting from high energy costs seems to expose something wrong, if not unjust, that should be examined by policymakers.

Some segments went so far as to defend Big Oil’s record profits, including by highlighting the losses the industry faced during the early phases of the pandemic when gas demand plummeted due to nationwide stay-at-home ordinances. Anchor Sandra Smith on America Reports listed all the major oil companies’ losses and profits over the past two years, saying that it was important context to understand the profit loss in 2020 as the companies are being “demonized” for profiting in 2021.

Video From the April 6, 2022, episode of Fox News' America Reports

Notably, while oil industry profits did dip during the pandemic, CEO salaries did not. According to an analysis by BailoutWatch, reported by Gizmodo, oil executives' salaries remained intact in 2020 as the industry was laying off workers while receiving federal handouts:

“The analysis finds that at a dozen oil companies—including big names like Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Phillips 66—CEO pay in 2020 was more than 100 times that of the median worker’s pay. All of those companies laid people off last year, including thenine companies that collectively got $4.8 billion in federal bailout money.”

CNN and MSNBC missed an opportunity to hold Big Oil accountable

CNN and MSNBC dedicated only 10 minutes and 4 minutes, respectively, to covering the April 6 hearing — even as the issue of high gas prices remains a mainstay of cable news. One segment on CNN accounted for nearly all of CNN’s coverage — an over 7-minute joint interview on CNN Newsroom with Ana Cabrera withRobert Reich, a public policy professor and former labor secretary, and Daniel Raimi, energy analyst with Resources for the Future.

The segment served, in part, as an example of how CNN and MSNBC could have used the hearing to more robustly cut through reductive and agenda-driven industry and right-wing media talking points to provide a more holistic understanding of why gas prices are high and what tools are available to help alleviate cost to consumers.

Video From the April 6, 2022, episode of CNN Newsroom with Ana Cabrera

The majority of MSNBC’s 4 minutes of hearing coverage was aired in the closing moments of The 11th Hour with Stephanie Ruhle. Host Stephanie Ruhle first laid out the contrasting positions by Democrats and Republicans overseeing the hearing and then told her viewers:   

:{

}:

“This might be a good time to let you know thatmembers of this very subcommittee received a whopping $383,000 from Big Oil. And according to the FEC, 97% of that money went to Republicans. So, what did the oil executives have to say about the high prices Americans are paying at the pump? They said it's not their fault.”

Video

CitationFrom the April 6, 2022, episode of MSNBC's The 11th Hour With Stephanie Ruhle

While good, both segments only scratched the surface of the information (on gas prices) and accountability (of the oil industry).

In fact, in October, CNN and MSNBC managed to devote a modest amount of coverage to a congressional hearing on Big Oil disinformation, providing a glimmer of what accountability journalism could look like if cable news shows began seriously interrogating the fossil fuel industry. But the sparse coverage of this latest hearing represents a failure on part of the networks to both build on that accountability and, particularly in this moment, provide necessary context around high prices.

Fox News is shaping discussion around climate and energy issues

The April 6 hearing is not the first time Fox News has dominated coverage of key climate and energy actions or newsworthy moments. After the Green New Deal was introduced in 2019, Fox News relentlessly attacked the climate and justice actions and hammered the same messaging — tethering the proposal to radical socialism, climate alarmism, and economic devastation, while vilifying those who champion it. In comparison, other TV news networks made only a cursory attempt to articulate what the Green New Deal is and what it would accomplish. As a result, for Fox viewers, the Green New Deal has become synonymous with extreme socialism manifested by a fake climate crisis.

In the month following candidate Joe Biden unveiling his climate agenda in July 2019, Fox News aired 7 times the number of segments CNN aired and more than 4 times the segments aired on MSNBC. In fact, the network’s coverage of energy and climate issues in the fall months of the 2020 presidential campaign played a role shaping the related presidential debate questions.

After Biden took office on January 27, 2021, Fox spent approximately 1 hour and 50 minutes that day discussing Biden’s day one executive orders (including canceling the Keystone XL pipeline). CNN spent nearly half as much time, at approximately 53 minutes, MSNBC spent 1 hour and 24 minutes discussing the topics. While this data may not be as striking, it doesn’t include the amount of time Fox spent covering, for example, the canceled Keystone XL pipeline long after the other networks had moved on. Even now, Fox News has still repeatedly invoked the scrapped pipeline as one of the reasons contributing to the current energy crisis, even though the pipeline would not have had an impact on gas prices.

It is troubling to see CNN and MSNBC repeatedly yield coverage of major climate and energy stories to Fox News, and it’s time for the networks to step up.

Methodology

// rick scott?

https://www.alternet.org/2022/02/madison-cawthorn-2656782306/

U.S. Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) has revealed his “New Contract with America” that’s designed to destroy Social Security, one of the most successful and life-saving programs in U.S. history, to “incentivize” the elderly to return to work.

That’s just one aspect of what Cawthorn describes as a 10-point plan that reads like a far right-wing dream from capitalist kingpins to return America to the days of child labor, seven-day work weeks, and no retirement for senior citizens. But it does call for the federal government to “promote and celebrate the American manufacturing and agriculture industry by incentivizing domestic production,” despite the US economy being so on fire the Federal Reserve is poised to dramatically raise interest rates to cool off spending and so-called “inflation.”

The youngest member of Congress, currently facing a legal battle that could ban him from keeping his seat over his role in the January 6 insurrection, explained to Fox News his “new Contract With America is really a “retort” to the Green New Deal.

“I think the Green New Deal is much less of a climate plan and much more of a Communist manifesto.”

Cawthorn does not reveal who actually wrote the plan, which is in the form of a House resolution (embedded below) – so it has zero chance of passing as long as Democrats hold the chamber.

It includes “slashing government spending by a third by 2031; enacting a balanced budget amendment; and abolishing the income tax and finding a replacement flat tax or consumption tax by 2026,” Fox News adds.

“The contract also calls for abolishing the Department of Education, making English the official language of the United States, banning federal funding for critical race theory teachings, and enacting school choice on the federal level so federal dollars follow the students to their school of choice, including private religious schools.”

There’s also a companion video that looks more like a video game than a rational political agenda.

[vid] ncwa

mma 10 21

Joe Biden’s Build Back Better agenda, which is largely represented in the Democrat’s $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill, would materially benefit millions of Americans through unprecedented investments in our social safety net and efforts to combat climate change. Polling suggests that the spending bill is popular among the American people. Expectedly, Fox News has characterized the package as a “socialist wish list” and picked off a litany of minor ticket items to rally outrage and opposition on the right.

Former Trump aide Stephen Miller’s description of the bill on the October 16 edition of the Fox News show *Watters’ World* is representative of how the network is using its tried-and-true dog whistles to poison and stoke fear about the bill:

STEPHEN MILLER (GUEST): It's basically the Green New Deal, combined with critical race theory, combined with massive amnesty and open borders, combined with the complete destruction of the American economy.

Among the provisions Fox has characterized as the Green New Deal and mocked or grossly misrepresented are: the Civilian Climate Corps; an initiative referred to as Tree Equity; and a program intended to redress historic inequities and environmental injustices associated with zoning decisions and highway placement, which Fox has referred to as fixing “racists roads.”

Fox’s coverage of these programs has not attempted to describe what they entail or what they would accomplish for hundreds of communities. Rather, they have been used as punchlines or set up for cheap shots that reflect Fox’s racist ethos and climate denial — all under the guise of informing Fox’s audience about the policies contained in the reconciliation package.

Fox has grossly misrepresented the Civilian Climate Corps -- “climate cops” is not a thing KOCH FORK 4]

The reconciliation bill includes $8 billion earmarked for the Civilian Climate Corps -- modeled after the depression-era Civilian Conservation Corps -- which would establish a government jobs program that would put Americans to “work conserving our public lands and waters, bolstering community resilience, and advancing environmental justice.” The current funding for this program represents .4% of the $3.5 trillion spending in the bill.

On October 12, the Republican Study Committee chaired by Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) released a memo on policies contained in the reconciliation package, claiming that while the bill is polling favorably, support would tank if the American people understood what was in it. It lists among the “policies to wreck America” the Climate Civilian Corps, which the memo characterizes as “a cabal of federally funded climate police … who will conduct progressive activism on taxpayers’ dime.”

There isn’t even a grain of truth in how the committee characterized the program: “Climate police” is to the reconciliation bill what “cow farts” was to the Green New Deal. But that won’t stop conservative media from running with it.

The Republican Study Committee wasn’t the first to characterize the program this way -- during the early stages of drafting the bill, climate denier Marc Morano suggested on Fox & Friends Firstthat participants could resemble “climate cops” -- but the memo certainly reinvigorated the idea on Fox.

On the October 12 edition of *The Ingraham Angle*, Banks said the bill would “create a climate police department. This was a wacky idea that AOC came out with a couple of years ago. We all laughed at it because we thought it would never happen and now it’s on the brink of happening.” The following day, at least four programs described the program this way. On October 14, Banks appeared on both *Kudlow* on the Fox Business Network and Fox News' Faulkner Focus, claiming that the bill contains billions to create a “climate police department or a militia to go out and enforce Green New Deal policies."

[vid

October 14, 2021, episode of Fox News' Faulkner Focus]

Fox mocked and belittled provisions to address environmental injustices

Notably, during the Faulkner Focus segment Banks also referred to a program to fix “racist roads.” In fact, what he’s referring to is a $4 billion fund intended to address historic inequities and environmental injustices associated with zoning decisions and highway placement, which in some cases have divided once-thriving communities of color. The fund represents about .1% of the spending in the reconciliation bill.

Biden’s original infrastructure plan called for a $20 billion fund to “reconnect” neighborhoods cut off by old transportation projects. This would benefit communities like one in New Orleans whose residents have lived under the Claiborne Expressway for decades and remember how vibrant their community was before “The Monster” was built. After construction began on the highway in the 1960s, the once-thriving Tremé community, a center of Black cultural and commercial life, was divided and diminished. When the program was first introduced as part of the infrastructure plan, Fox’s Tucker Carlson suggested, in a blatantly racist rant, that the program was a form of reparations. This plan was cut in the bipartisan infrastructure bill negotiations, and a drastically reduced version is funded by the proposed $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill. Also among the litany of “controversial” items in the bill, often cited by Fox News hosts and anchors, is an initiative to plant trees, particularly in urban areas with less canopy cover to reduce the effects of extreme heat.

For example, during the October 13 edition of *The Ingraham Angle*, host Laura Ingraham fearmongered that the bill will “bankrupt the next generation, steal the next generation” before listing the “priorities” embedded in the legislation:

Eight billion bucks for a Civilian Climate Corps. It’s going to act basically as ataxpayer-funded leftist police force.$4 billion for equity — I love that word — in electric vehicle charging and tree planting.$643 million would go toward procuring culturally appropriate foods — I kid you not — for school lunches. Forget chicken tenders and Friday pizza, I guess.Free community college for illegals, of course. They’ll be eligible for child tax credits as well.My personal favorite, though — this is a drop in the bucket for the federal government. $15 million for national resource centers focused on providing services for older individuals who are underserved due to their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The tree equity initiative Ingraham refers to is a commonsense solution to addressing the heat island effect, which disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities across the US. Communities without sufficient canopy cover can reach temperatures up to 10  degrees higher than those that do, and one proven solution is to plant more trees in those neighborhoods.

On September 27, the day the reconciliation package was revealed, America’s Newsroomincluded the tree equity plan as one of the “doozies” that was buried in the bill while the Faulkner Focus also referred to it as one of the bill’s “hidden goodies” and mocked that there was “$3 billion for tree planting and so-called tree equity. Important that the trees feel equal to one another.”

In fact, there has been no shortage of “equity” jokes -- Greg Gutfeld on the September 29 edition of his late-night show Gutfeld! suggested that the program was meant to address “foilage privilege” (he meant “foliage”). And on the October 2 edition of *Fox & Friends Saturday*, in response to the program, Pete Hegseth quipped, “The oak trees feel like they have been too dominant for too long.” But for all the punchlines, there has been little attempt to understand what the program is or explain the issue it is proven to address.

Predictably, Fox has not scratched the surface of what the reconciliation bill means for climate mitigation

While the climate and environmental justice provisions that Fox has featured in its reconciliation bill coverage represent just a fraction of its spending, they are not an insignificant part of the Biden administration’s larger climate agenda, of which addressing environmental injustices and creating green union jobs are core pillars. They should be reported on. But Fox has framed the reconciliation bill as a radical-socialist wish list of trivial programs -- in fact, it represents, from a climate perspective, possibly the last chance to enact meaningful U.S. policies for the foreseeable future, which could make or break the global response to the climate crisis. But as long as Fox keeps its viewers revved up over “cow farts” and “climate cops” its base will never see the burning forest for the equitable trees.

mma 10 21

Joe Biden’s Build Back Better agenda, which is largely represented in the Democrat’s $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill, would materially benefit millions of Americans through unprecedented investments in our social safety net and efforts to combat climate change. Polling suggests that the spending bill is popular among the American people. Expectedly, Fox News has characterized the package as a “socialist wish list” and picked off a litany of minor ticket items to rally outrage and opposition on the right.

Former Trump aide Stephen Miller’s description of the bill on the October 16 edition of the Fox News show *Watters’ World* is representative of how the network is using its tried-and-true dog whistles to poison and stoke fear about the bill:

STEPHEN MILLER (GUEST): It's basically the Green New Deal, combined with critical race theory, combined with massive amnesty and open borders, combined with the complete destruction of the American economy.

Among the provisions Fox has characterized as the Green New Deal and mocked or grossly misrepresented are: the Civilian Climate Corps; an initiative referred to as Tree Equity; and a program intended to redress historic inequities and environmental injustices associated with zoning decisions and highway placement, which Fox has referred to as fixing “racists roads.”

Fox’s coverage of these programs has not attempted to describe what they entail or what they would accomplish for hundreds of communities. Rather, they have been used as punchlines or set up for cheap shots that reflect Fox’s racist ethos and climate denial — all under the guise of informing Fox’s audience about the policies contained in the reconciliation package.

Fox has grossly misrepresented the Civilian Climate Corps -- “climate cops” is not a thing KOCH FORK 4]

The reconciliation bill includes $8 billion earmarked for the Civilian Climate Corps -- modeled after the depression-era Civilian Conservation Corps -- which would establish a government jobs program that would put Americans to “work conserving our public lands and waters, bolstering community resilience, and advancing environmental justice.” The current funding for this program represents .4% of the $3.5 trillion spending in the bill.

On October 12, the Republican Study Committee chaired by Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) released a memo on policies contained in the reconciliation package, claiming that while the bill is polling favorably, support would tank if the American people understood what was in it. It lists among the “policies to wreck America” the Climate Civilian Corps, which the memo characterizes as “a cabal of federally funded climate police … who will conduct progressive activism on taxpayers’ dime.”

There isn’t even a grain of truth in how the committee characterized the program: “Climate police” is to the reconciliation bill what “cow farts” was to the Green New Deal. But that won’t stop conservative media from running with it.

The Republican Study Committee wasn’t the first to characterize the program this way -- during the early stages of drafting the bill, climate denier Marc Morano suggested on Fox & Friends Firstthat participants could resemble “climate cops” -- but the memo certainly reinvigorated the idea on Fox.

On the October 12 edition of *The Ingraham Angle*, Banks said the bill would “create a climate police department. This was a wacky idea that AOC came out with a couple of years ago. We all laughed at it because we thought it would never happen and now it’s on the brink of happening.” The following day, at least four programs described the program this way. On October 14, Banks appeared on both *Kudlow* on the Fox Business Network and Fox News' Faulkner Focus, claiming that the bill contains billions to create a “climate police department or a militia to go out and enforce Green New Deal policies."

[vid

October 14, 2021, episode of Fox News' Faulkner Focus]

Fox mocked and belittled provisions to address environmental injustices

Notably, during the Faulkner Focus segment Banks also referred to a program to fix “racist roads.” In fact, what he’s referring to is a $4 billion fund intended to address historic inequities and environmental injustices associated with zoning decisions and highway placement, which in some cases have divided once-thriving communities of color. The fund represents about .1% of the spending in the reconciliation bill.

Biden’s original infrastructure plan called for a $20 billion fund to “reconnect” neighborhoods cut off by old transportation projects. This would benefit communities like one in New Orleans whose residents have lived under the Claiborne Expressway for decades and remember how vibrant their community was before “The Monster” was built. After construction began on the highway in the 1960s, the once-thriving Tremé community, a center of Black cultural and commercial life, was divided and diminished. When the program was first introduced as part of the infrastructure plan, Fox’s Tucker Carlson suggested, in a blatantly racist rant, that the program was a form of reparations. This plan was cut in the bipartisan infrastructure bill negotiations, and a drastically reduced version is funded by the proposed $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill. Also among the litany of “controversial” items in the bill, often cited by Fox News hosts and anchors, is an initiative to plant trees, particularly in urban areas with less canopy cover to reduce the effects of extreme heat.

For example, during the October 13 edition of *The Ingraham Angle*, host Laura Ingraham fearmongered that the bill will “bankrupt the next generation, steal the next generation” before listing the “priorities” embedded in the legislation:

Eight billion bucks for a Civilian Climate Corps. It’s going to act basically as ataxpayer-funded leftist police force.$4 billion for equity — I love that word — in electric vehicle charging and tree planting.$643 million would go toward procuring culturally appropriate foods — I kid you not — for school lunches. Forget chicken tenders and Friday pizza, I guess.Free community college for illegals, of course. They’ll be eligible for child tax credits as well.My personal favorite, though — this is a drop in the bucket for the federal government. $15 million for national resource centers focused on providing services for older individuals who are underserved due to their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The tree equity initiative Ingraham refers to is a commonsense solution to addressing the heat island effect, which disproportionately impacts Black and brown communities across the US. Communities without sufficient canopy cover can reach temperatures up to 10  degrees higher than those that do, and one proven solution is to plant more trees in those neighborhoods.

On September 27, the day the reconciliation package was revealed, America’s Newsroomincluded the tree equity plan as one of the “doozies” that was buried in the bill while the Faulkner Focus also referred to it as one of the bill’s “hidden goodies” and mocked that there was “$3 billion for tree planting and so-called tree equity. Important that the trees feel equal to one another.”

In fact, there has been no shortage of “equity” jokes -- Greg Gutfeld on the September 29 edition of his late-night show Gutfeld! suggested that the program was meant to address “foilage privilege” (he meant “foliage”). And on the October 2 edition of *Fox & Friends Saturday*, in response to the program, Pete Hegseth quipped, “The oak trees feel like they have been too dominant for too long.” But for all the punchlines, there has been little attempt to understand what the program is or explain the issue it is proven to address.

Predictably, Fox has not scratched the surface of what the reconciliation bill means for climate mitigation

While the climate and environmental justice provisions that Fox has featured in its reconciliation bill coverage represent just a fraction of its spending, they are not an insignificant part of the Biden administration’s larger climate agenda, of which addressing environmental injustices and creating green union jobs are core pillars. They should be reported on. But Fox has framed the reconciliation bill as a radical-socialist wish list of trivial programs -- in fact, it represents, from a climate perspective, possibly the last chance to enact meaningful U.S. policies for the foreseeable future, which could make or break the global response to the climate crisis. But as long as Fox keeps its viewers revved up over “cow farts” and “climate cops” its base will never see the burning forest for the equitable trees.

Google

Marc Morano

Weekly update · October 1, 2021

NEWS

Greta's blah blah blah will be Countered by Marc Morano's "Green New Deal -WFMZ

WFMZ Allentown

Marc Morano, author, and climate realist activist will counter many of Greta's claims to phase out fossil fuels 'immediately' in his presentation "Green New ...

Politicians Can't Stop Climate Change – Free Online Events with Dr. Guus Berkhout and ...

PR Web

Marc Morano, American author, and long-time climate realist will present “Green New Deal: The Great Regret” on Oct. 6, 2021, at 7pm MDT, with live Q&A to ...

New Yorker Magazine Has a Moral Obligation to Open the Climate Debate Before COP26 ...

WFMZ Allentown

... part two ofFriends of Science Society's 18th Annual Event online will feature American author Marc Morano with "Green New Deal: The Great Regret".

Greta's blah blah blah will be Countered by Marc Morano's “Green New Deal - The Chestnut Post

The Chestnut Post

In the two-part free online event, Dr. Guus Berkhout of CLINTEL presents Oct. 2, 2021, and Marc Morano presents “Green New Deal – The Great Regret” on Oct.

Twin Attacks on Science and Freedom | FreedomFest 2021 - The New American

The New American

Marc Morano is the founder of ClimateDepot.com, one of the most popular and informative sources of information debunking climate alarmism.