reading assignment
ebonyiasia
TheGreenNewDealexplained-Vox.pdf
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 1/40
Sunrise Movement protesters urging Democrats to back a Green New Deal in late 2018. | Sunrise Movement
Update, 3/30/2019: Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY)
introduced a Green New Deal resolution on February 7 that lays out the goals, aspirations,
and specifics of the program in a more definitive way. Read about it here, and read about
Millions of readers rely on Vox’s free explanatory journalism to understand and navigate the coronavirus
crisis. Support our work with a contribution now.
Contribute
Support our journalism ×
The Green New Deal, explained An insurgent movement is pushing Democrats to back an ambitious climate change solution. By David Roberts @drvox [email protected] Updated Mar 30, 2019, 8:23am EDT
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 2/40
the criticism that followed here and here. The Senate voted the resolution down on March
26, but Ocasio-Cortez is now drafting a series of smaller, related bills. Our initial explainer,
first published on December 21, follows.
If the recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is to be believed,
humanity has just over a decade to get carbon emissions under control before
catastrophic climate change impacts become unavoidable.
The Republican Party generally ignores or denies that problem. But the Democratic Party
claims to accept and understand it.
It is odd, then, that Democrats do not have a plan to address climate change.
Their last big plan — the American Clean Energy and Security Act — passed the House in
2009 but went on to die an unceremonious death before reaching the Senate floor. Since
then, there’s been nothing to replace it.
Plenty of Democratic politicians support policies that would reduce climate pollution —
renewable energy tax credits, fuel economy standards, and the like — but those policies do
not add up to a comprehensive solution, certainly nothing like what the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) suggests is necessary.
Young activists, who will be forced to live with the ravages of climate change, find this
upsetting. So they have proposed a plan of their own. It’s called the Green New Deal (GND)
— a term purposefully reminiscent of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s original New Deal in the
1930s — and it has become the talk of the town. Here are Google searches from the past
few months:
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 3/40
For this story, I talked to wonks and political activists who are working on the GND, and
without exception, they expressed surprise at the speed and intensity with which both
media attention and activist energy have centered on it. There is a sense among those
involved that they have caught a tiger by the tail.
The GND push has thrust climate change into the national conversation, put House
Democrats on notice, and created an intense and escalating bandwagon effect. Politicians
(most recently 2020 presidential aspirant Cory Booker), advocates (most recently Al
Gore), wonks, and activists — everyone involved in green politics is talking about the GND.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC US House candidate, NY-14
...and we have #GreenNewDeal lift-off! Never underestimate the power of public imagination.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 4/40
But ... WTF is it?
As we will see, the exact details of the GND remain to be worked out, but the broad thrust
is fairly simple. It refers, in the loosest sense, to a massive program of investments in
clean-energy jobs and infrastructure, meant to transform not just the energy sector, but
the entire economy. It is meant both to decarbonize the economy and to make it fairer and
more just.
But the policy is only part of the picture. Just as striking are the politics, which seem to
have tapped into an enormous, untapped demand for climate ambition.
When I think about the social status of the GND, I am struck by an analogy: It’s a bit like
concentrated solar power. (I’m an energy nerd. Sue me.) In a concentrated solar power
plant, large arrays of mirrors reflect sunlight onto a single tower, heating the fluid inside it.
The fluid transfers heat to water, the steam from the boiling fluid drives a turbine, and the
turbine generates electrical power.
4:07 PM · Dec 14, 2018
16K 3.1K people are Tweeting about this
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 5/40
The GND is the tower, and all the sudden, all the mirrors are aligned, focused on it. The heat
is building, the water is rapidly reaching a boil. Meanwhile, its owners are racing to build a
turbine.
DOE
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 6/40
There is immense potential energy in the GND, a concentration of social attention and
intensity. But converting that heat to power — to real results on the ground — will involve a
great deal of political and policy engineering, almost all of which lies ahead.
The GND has great potential, but then, American political history is a long story of wasted
potential, of waves of progressive enthusiasm breaking on the rocky shores of
Washington, DC, to no lasting effect. Whether that fate awaits the GND depends on many
things, among them whether President Donald Trump — the culmination of a history of
total Republican intransigence and ugliness the stretches over young activists’ entire adult
lives — has changed the political landscape enough that Democrats might leave behind
their long defensive crouch and voice some ambition.
Before jumping in, it’s worth noting that a number of great journalists have blazed the trail
on this story already. See, in particular: Kate Aronoff’s work, here and here but especially,
for the big picture, here; Hannah Northey and the crew at E&E are all over the daily
developments; Alexander Kaufman at Huffington Post keeps track of the politics; and
Rob Meyer at the Atlantic always has good thoughts. (There are no doubt many others I’m
forgetting.)
To get a handle on the GND, let’s take a spin through its history, the role it’s playing in
current politics, the effort to back it up with a real policy program, and the many, many
challenges facing it before it can become legislation.
The GND concept is not new
The first use of the term “GND” in the US may trace to New York Times columnist Thomas
Friedman, who called for one in a 2007 column (and in his book Hot, Flat, and Crowded)
as a kind of green globalism. (Funny thing, politics.) As Kaufman notes in a story on this
history, none other than Barack Obama was taken by Friedman’s idea and included a GND
in his 2008 platform. (It can also be argued that Obama’s stimulus bill was a proto-GND in
itself.)
Around the same time, in 2007, British economist Richard Murphy began discussing a GND
and founded the Green New Deal Group, which funneled some ideas to the Labour Party.
The UN also took up the idea, calling for a global GND in 2009.
But then Tories won in the UK in 2009, the Republicans swept the 2010 midterms, and the
idea mostly went quiescent, at least among politicians.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 7/40
In 2016, a GND became the centerpiece of the Green Party presidential campaign of Jill
Stein; indeed, a GND has been part of the US Green Party’s platform for over a decade. (It
is also central to the platform of the European Greens — see this study from the
Wuppertal Institute.)
Bernie Sanders’s 2016 campaign included a GND. And then, in the 2018 midterms,
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, now a representative-elect, took it up.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
But that capsule history of the term itself, the brand, somewhat sells short the intellectual
lineage. Many pieces of the GND have been worked on by many people over the years. The
constituent ideas — 100 percent clean energy; a just transition to a new, better economy;
massive public sector investments — are not new.
Talk of a “blue-green alliance” between labor and environmentalists, built around public
infrastructure investments and new jobs, goes all the way back to 2000 presidential
candidate Ralph Nader; real work has been underway at least since 2006, when the, er,
Blue-Green Alliance was established. The AFL-CIO has its own big infrastructure plan.
Van Jones wrote a book about green jobs back in 2008 and even worked briefly as an
Obama green jobs adviser, before a right-wing smear campaign drove him from the
| The Washington Post/Getty Images
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 8/40
administration. The whole green-economy frame almost took root, but once the Dems
went on the defensive in 2010, it faded to the background.
In Washington state this year, activists ran a ballot initiative that coupled a carbon tax
with a GND-style program of investments, but, in the face of $30 million of oil money, it
went down to defeat.
Nonetheless, the basic GND ideas have persisted. And their appeal only grew as climate
warnings became more dire. They were in the collective water, like an oversaturated
solution, just waiting for a particle around which to crystallize.
That particle came in November.
The GND comes to Washington
After the 2016 race, some of the folks who worked on the Sanders campaign started an
organization called Brand New Congress, with the audacious (some might say insane)
goal of recruiting 400 fresh new faces to run for, and take over, Congress. Part of the
shared platform was an ambitious, WWII-style mobilization on climate change (though not
yet branded GND).
That effort did not result in a congressional takeover, but it was not without fruits. Brand
New Congress spun off a group called Justice Democrats that went on to recruit several
winning candidates like Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley.
Among them was Ocasio-Cortez, the young bartender who ran against incumbent centrist
Democrat Joe Crowley in the New York’s 14th District primary. The co-founder of Brand
New Congress, Saikat Chakrabarti, became Ocasio-Cortez’s co-campaign manager. (As of
January, he will be her chief of staff.) And Ocasio-Cortez, who was already committed to
putting climate change at the top of her agenda, eagerly embraced the green mobilization
plan and began using the GND branding.
Then came the first week of orientation for new members of Congress.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 9/40
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her campaign manager, Saikat Chakrabarti.
Several things came together that week. Shortly prior, the IPCC had released its latest
report, with the ominous news that humanity has just over a decade to peak and begin
rapidly reducing global carbon emissions if there is to be any hope of hitting the (already
inadequate) international target of limiting global temperature rise to no more than 2
degrees Celsius.
There was already enormous energy and mobilization on the left, thanks to the election,
and young activists were keen to push climate change to the top of the agenda.
Then a piece in the Hill reported that House Democrats had no plans to move on climate
change, which appeared nowhere in their list of priorities. Meanwhile, House Minority
Leader Nancy Pelosi started talking the day after the election about a “bipartisan
marketplace of ideas,” which is not exactly what you’d call reading the room.
Pelosi signaled that she planned to revive the Select Committee on Energy Independence
and Global Warming (2007 to 2011, RIP), but activists and the incoming class of social
democrats wanted something much bolder.
They didn’t see any point in pursuing cooperation with Republicans, a strategy that has
proven fruitless for a decade. And they didn’t want climate policy tucked away in a
| AP
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 10/40
committee that would do nothing but hold hearings and discuss how real global warming is
(spoiler: so real).
But it gave them something to ask for. They couldn’t very well demand the full GND before
the new Congress was even sworn in. But they could ask for a commitment.
So the Sunrise Movement, a youth-led organization organizing around a GND, planned a
sit-in in Pelosi’s office, to demand a committee with teeth — a committee that would be
charged with actually developing a plan to meet the ambitious targets implied by the IPCC
report.
Sunrise approached Ocasio-Cortez to ask if she might help publicize the event, perhaps
with a tweet. Instead, she vowed to show up. She and her team had been casting around
for some early way to push the GND into the public consciousness and onto the
Democratic agenda.
Working together, Sunrise, Ocasio-Cortez, and the Justice Democrats quickly hashed out a
proposal for a Select Committee on a Green New Deal, outlining their vision for the kind
of plan such a committee would produce.
Sunrise brought close to 200 young activists to Pelosi’s office on November 13. Ocasio-
Cortez, taking a break from orientation, stopped by to rally them and show her support.
The media swarmed.
In retrospect, though it came together on the fly, the timing was fortuitous. The elections
were over; there was no presidential election yet; Trump hadn’t tweeted in a few whole
minutes; the political press was bored. The IPCC had put climate change in the news. And
the prospect of a young, newly elected, not-yet-sworn-in progressive representative
leading a youth protest against her leader-to-be proved irresistible.
In the ensuing weeks, Ocasio-Cortez and Sunrise pushed incoming members of Congress
to sign on to the GND Select Committee plan. On December 10, there was another sit-in
in Pelosi’s office, this time with activists stretched out the door. By the end, 40 members
of Congress — including several notable senators like Booker, Sanders, and Jeff Merkley,
each a potential 2020 presidential candidate — signed on to support the committee.
Sunrise Movement @sunrisemvmt
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 11/40
It was an activist campaign building momentum for serious climate action, and it was
making headlines.
Dem leadership gives activists the stiff arm
40 Representatives now back the Select Committee for a #GreenNewDeal -- one of the most ambitious economic and climate policies ever discussed in Congress. Our organizing is working. We're changing politics in America.
10:24 AM · Dec 19, 2018
1.2K 453 people are Tweeting about this
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 12/40
Nonetheless, it seems Democratic leadership was not particularly happy about a group of
upstarts laying claim to a major issue and instructing the caucus how to approach it. Pelosi
largely gave Ocasio-Cortez and activists the cold shoulder. They were not warned before
Steny Hoyer announced on Wednesday that the committee will not have subpoena
power. And they were not warned before it leaked on Thursday that Rep. Kathy Castor of
Florida had been chosen to head the committee, which would in fact be the same old
select committee on climate change.
As for the GND? “I think they have some terrific ideas,” Castor said, all but patting activists
on the head. “But that’s not going to be our sole focus.”
What about the activists’ other major demand, that no one who accepts fossil fuel money
be allowed on the committee? “I don’t think you can do that under the First Amendment,
really,” she said.
She later admitted to Kaufman at the Huffington Post that this peculiar bit of
constitutional interpretation was “inartful,” and she just doesn’t know if she can do that as
chair of the committee. She says maybe she’ll talk it over with the caucus.
This is a clear rebuke from Pelosi and Hoyer, not only cutting short a growing activist
campaign, without warning, on the eve of the holidays, but also appointing a committee
chair who isn’t briefed on the debate around the committee, is reliable but undistinguished
on environmental issues, and clearly hasn’t been prepared for the activist fury that awaits
her. (It doesn’t seem particularly fair to Castor, either.)
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 13/40
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) on the far right and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi in the center. Between them is Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-OH).
“They’re not willing to go out on a limb unless they’re confident that they have the full
support of the caucus,” says Evan Weber, a co-founder of Sunrise, “which for us is
disappointing but not all that surprising.”
“What we thought was, let’s try to get the smallest possible thing done, which is get all
Democrats to agree that we should make a plan,” says Chakrabarti, but even that “isn’t so
easy.”
Here’s a revealing fact about this clash.
Though Chakrabarti may consider it the “smallest possible thing,” anyone who glances at
Ocasio-Cortez’s document will realize that it is far from small or easy. It doesn’t just call for
a committee. It says that no one who receives any fossil fuel funding may serve on the
committee (which would rule out a good swath of senior Democrats).
It requires that the committee produce a plan that fully decarbonizes the economy, invests
trillions of dollars, and provides a federal job guarantee, while addressing and mitigating
historical inequalities. (Oh, and it might also include such “additional measures such as
basic income programs [or] universal health care programs.”)
| Alex Wong/Getty Images
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 15/40
thing for the draft legislation was always to have a platform for candidates to run on in
2020.”
But in the end, the dispute was less about concrete issues of jurisdiction than a message
to newcomers. As E&E reports, “many Democratic lawmakers say the panel could be a
landing place for many of the freshmen members who have said they’d like to be on Energy
and Commerce.” The youngsters can have a committee to hold hearings and make
headlines. As for legislation, we adults have got that covered.
Would Ocasio-Cortez accept a spot on the committee? “She doesn’t want to be on a
committee just for the sake of being on a committee,” says Chakrabarti.
Frank Pallone, chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and reportedly no fan of the select committee.
What’s next for the GND
Though the committee fight was discouraging (and not everyone agrees about its tactical
wisdom), its reverberations reached well beyond DC. It produced an enormous jolt for the
movement.
All the sudden, the left has found something it had lacked for years: an ambitious, positive
climate program, something as bold and catchy as “Medicare-for-all” in health care.
Advocates and activists are on board and wonks are thinking about the mechanics.
| Toya Sarno Jordan/Getty Images
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 14/40
In short, it charges the committee with developing a plan of vaulting ambition and
complexity. If representatives were mainly focused on policy, some might have raised
cautions along these lines.
But neither Chakrabarti and Weber has heard any policy objections. No one has asked
about, say, the federal jobs guarantee. Rather, the objections have been almost entirely
about turf.
As Weber says, “certain politicians who were not excited about any select committee”
claimed that the committee’s jurisdiction would override the jurisdiction and authority of
existing committees.
The proposal never meant to assign the select committee the power to introduce
legislation, Weber says, but to make members more comfortable, language was added
clarifying as much. The committee could only produce a plan, as draft legislation for other
committees to take up or not as they see fit. “For us,” Weber says, “the more important
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC US House candidate, NY-14
Our ultimate end goal isn’t a Select Committee. Our goal is to treat Climate Change like the serious, existential threat it is by drafting an ambitious solution on the scale necessary - aka a Green New Deal - to get it done. A weak committee misses the point & endangers people.
Miranda Green @mirandacgreen Senior Dem leadership says @Ocasio2018's New Green Deal committee won't get subpoena power. The 2011 committee it plans to replace had those powers. thehill.com/policy/energy-…
5:20 PM · Dec 19, 2018
15K 3.5K people are Tweeting about this
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 16/40
“We thought it would take a year” to get a movement going around the GND, Chakrabarti
says. Instead, “it took weeks.”
Leaders have a few ideas about what to do next, including the possibility of a GND caucus
in the House (after all, the membership has already mostly identified itself) and continued
direct action.
But the top priority after the holidays is to begin the process of putting real policy meat on
the GND bones — hammering out an actual policy platform.
“If they’re not going to develop the plan,” Weber says. “We will. We’ll get together the
scientists, the engineers, the community leaders, the mayors and city councilors, create
the plan ourselves, and go out and build the public and political support to make it happen
over the next two years.”
As Weber concedes, “GND” can mean just about anything at the moment. Now the race is
on to make it mean something in particular — to produce something that activists and
wonks can agree on, that politicians can run on, and that the public can rally around.
Sunrise protestors.
A new think tank will transform the GND into a policy platform
| Sunrise Movement
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 17/40
As of now, the movement’s only “official” version of the GND is the Ocasio-Cortez
document. As sweeping and ambitious as it is, it is less a policy platform than a set of high-
level goals. Each one (e.g., “decarbonizing, repairing, and improving transportation and
other infrastructure”) would entail dozens of policies, at different levels of government.
The first and thus far only serious effort to fill out the policy side came in a report from
Greg Carlock at the upstart think tank Data For Progress. But even that report is less a
specific set of policy choices than an extensive policy menu — a set of options for each of
the program’s large-scale goals, everything from building standards to new techniques in
agriculture to investments in transit. It is something like a detailed snapshot of the policy
landscape, from which an architect could bricolage together a plan.
It is also a narrative tying those goals together, and its central theme — the central theme
of all contemporary GND work — is that the GND is not just a climate change policy. It is a
vision for a new kind of economy, built around a new set of social and economic
relationships. It is not merely a way to reduce emissions, but also to ameliorate the other
symptoms and dysfunctions of a late capitalist economy: growing inequality and
concentration of power at the top.
“Climate change is an emergent property of a bad economic system,” Carlock says. That
outmoded economic system — the nebulous set of assumptions and power relationships
that goes under the name “neoliberalism” — is the real target of the GND.
The GND is, at its heart, a form of social-democratic populism. Its intent is to involve the
entire citizenry in the shared project of adapting to the 21st century, and in so doing
materially improve the quality of life of the poor and middle class. It is an attempt to
rebalance the economy and the political system, away from a monomaniacal focus on
private goods, toward a more generous view of public goods and public purpose.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 18/40
FDR signs the Social Security Act in 1935.
At least that’s the idea. But getting from that idea to concrete policy platform that diverse
constituencies can rally around (and a broad array of Democrats can endorse) will be a
delicate and charged undertaking. Making those fraught policy choices is largely going to
fall on the shoulders of a young policy analyst whose name I suspect you will be hearing
much more of: Rhiana Gunn-Wright.
Gunn-Wright, who served as policy director on the insurgent gubernatorial campaign of
Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, works for a relatively new policy shop called New Consensus,
which spun off as the policy arm of Justice Democrats. At least through 2020, its sole
focus is to put together a policy platform that Democrats could, in theory, pass into law in
2020. (Northey has a good story on New Consensus.)
Organizer Demond Drummer will serve as the executive director, but Gunn-Wright will lead
the GND effort.
Obviously, figuring out how to fundamentally transform the world’s largest economy is a lot
for one person to take on. When I asked Gunn-Wright if she knows what she’s gotten into,
she laughs. “It’s really exciting!”
| Wikipedia
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 19/40
I heard grumbling here and there about the responsibility for policy being given over to a
new shop, rather than to the many people and organizations that have been working on
these issues, but Gunn-Wright is at pains to explain that she is not setting out to write a
GND on her own.
“This requires an incredible amount of policy knowledge, more than one group, definitely
more than one person can bring to bear,” she says, “so the hope is that it can be a
foundation for supporting research.”
The idea is to convene experts and activists to hash out a shared vision, prescriptive on
some matters, but offering a menu of options on others. The result will be a platform, a
way of using “policymaking as a form of organizing,” so that even wonks doing deep work
on a particular piece or activists rallying around an individual battle can be “connected to
the larger framework and plan,” she says.
Above all, she says, New Consensus is eager to “move forward in communication and in
alignment.”
When I noted that the transportation goals in the GND so far have been pretty broad and
aspirational, Gunn-Wright made it clear that these issues have been on her mind lately.
“What does it mean for light-duty electric vehicles?” she asked. “How are we dealing with
aviation? How are we dealing with shipping? Where do hydrogen fuel cells fit in? How are
we getting states to get together and get fleets big enough to do these deployments? How
are we dealing with school buses?” (This went on for several minutes.)
A BlueBird electric school bus. | BusinessWire
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 20/40
Or how about electricity? Currently, Gunn-Wright said, New Consensus is “partnering with
some analysts to model what it looks like if you have a national [renewable portfolio
standard] and a carbon tax. How do those two things interact? What’s the effect on
emissions? What is the economic effect?” (This too went on for several minutes.)
I delighted in the wonkery, but Gunn-Wright also returned the conversation again and again
to the effects of the program on ordinary people, especially the poor and vulnerable. “I
spent a little bit of time as a [user experience] researcher,” she says, “so my team also
thinks about the end user.” How does the average citizen find a suitable job, or get help
putting solar panels on their roof?
“If you have more money or access to power, you can either opt out or pay to make it
simpler,” she says. “The people who will have to go through all the mess are generally
poorer people, with the least access to power.”
Gunn-Wright’s command of the issues, coupled with her unapologetic belief in the public
sector to “shape markets and direct innovation,” coupled with her evident concern for the
low-income and working classes, make me excited to see what New Consensus produces.
Yet it remains an almost outlandishly ambitious undertaking: to coordinate and develop a
coherent policy platform that can guide a transformation of the economy, decarbonize
every economic sector, guarantee every American a well-paying job with good benefits,
strengthen the resilience of the country’s most vulnerable communities, command the
support of politicians from every region of the country, and inspire enthusiasm and action
among activists.
But Gunn-Wright is optimistic. “I’ve never worked on a policy issue where I was met with so
much good will, people who will share information, people willing to leverage their talents
and have conversations,” she says. “That gives me a lot of hope.”
So it still remains to hammer out a specific GND. But that doesn’t mean there’s no
substance to it at all. At least among the movement around Sunrise and Ocasio-Cortez,
there is a substantial degree of consensus about the core elements.
The three core principles of the GND: decarbonization, jobs, and justice
I asked the same question of everyone I talked to: What are your bottom lines? What must
be in a policy platform for it to earn the name GND? Answers varied considerably in their
details and emphasis, but they clustered around three basic principles.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 21/40
1) The plan must decarbonize the economy.
The young people who will have to live with the effects of climate change want a plan that
begins with what is necessary rather than what is deemed politically possible. “We want
the policy to match the findings in the IPCC report — to match the scale of the problem,”
says Waleed Shahid of Justice Democrats. Or as Gunn-Wright puts it, “We need to go all
the way.”
That means decarbonizing the US economy: getting the electricity sector to zero carbon
as soon as possible and other sectors shortly thereafter. That is a gargantuan undertaking
that will touch every American life.
Ocasio-Cortez’s platform calls for 100 percent renewable electricity within 10 years, but
very few policy experts believe that is possible. Carlock, along with most other wonks in
the field, thinks it’s preferable to shoot for 100 percent “clean and renewable energy,” to
make room for non-renewable carbon-free options like existing nuclear plants or any new
developments in nuclear, biomass, or carbon capture and sequestration. And they also
think it’s best to push the target out a bit. (Carlock has it at 2035.)
JesseJenkins @JesseJenkins
Replying to @JesseJenkins
Finding feasible and cost-effective paths to a carbon-free grid is as important as ever! For guidance, @max_energy @samthernstrom & I reviewed 40 academic studies charting course to a decarbonized power system & synthesized findings in a paper just published in the journal Joule.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 22/40
Other energy applications will be even more challenging than electricity. Decarbonizing
transportation will involve radically accelerating the spread of electric vehicles, possibly by
banning gasoline and diesel vehicle sales by 2030, and figuring out what to do with aviation
and heavy transport.
Buildings produce about 40 percent of annual US carbon emissions. Decarbonizing
buildings will involve implementing zero-carbon standards for all new buildings and funding
the wholesale retrofitting of existing buildings, millions of which use fossil fuels like natural
gas for heating and cooling.
Then there’s heavy industry, where decarbonization remains something of a mystery, the
work barely begun.
And on and on. Ocasio-Cortez’s plan actually calls for decarbonizing not just electricity but
the entire US economy in 10 years, which is almost certainly impossible absent radical
reductions in Americans’ energy consumption, something like imposed austerity — and
nobody thinks Americans are that scared of climate change. Even decarbonizing the
economy by 2050, as Carlock’s report calls for, is an extraordinarily daunting challenge,
involving hundreds of discrete policy problems, each facing their own dilemmas and
entrenched interests.
2) The plan must include a federal jobs guarantee and large-scale public
investments.
Again, the GND is not just climate policy. It’s about transforming the economy, lifting the up
the poor and middle class, and creating a more muscular, active public sector.
The GND “opens an opportunity to renegotiate power relationships between the public
sector, the private sector, and the people,” says Gunn-Wright. “We are interested in
solutions that create more democratic structures in our economy.”
Weber says that the key is to “connect [the GND] inextricably to the economic pain that so
many Americans still feel, and show people that there’s a way to build a better economy
4:17 PM · Dec 11, 2018
107 52 people are Tweeting about this
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 23/40
and improve their lives through action on climate change.”
To that end, the GND would involve large-scale investments, on the order of trillions of
dollars over 10 years, alongside a federal jobs guarantee. A job paying at least $15 an hour,
with good benefits, would be available to anyone who wanted one.
Politically, this is the key to the GND. It’s a program that can involve everyone and help
everyone — and, theoretically, gain support from everyone, even those in red states who
do not care about climate change. The investments and the job guarantee take the GND
out of the realm of environmental policy and move it into the realm of transformational
economic policy.
WPA poster, circa 1935.
But policy-wise, this is also, in many ways, the least cooked piece. The federal job
guarantee has substantial support among wonks (here’s an argument in favor from
scholars at the Levy Economics Institute), but also a good bit of opposition. (Matt Bruenig
runs through some of the objections; Josh Bivens of the Economic Policy Institute
argues for other ways of reaching full employment.)
| Wikipedia
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 24/40
The way to think about the basic problem is: You’re attempting to train and employ
everyone who happens to want a job at the moment — a constantly fluctuating flow of
people with differing skills, who will need jobs for differing periods of time. You’re trying to
provide those jobs through a massive program of investments. But what sorts of
investments provide work for a job force of perpetually shifting skills and composition?
Specifically, what subset of those investments are both “green” and suitable for a
morphing, countercyclical job force?
It’s not as easy to spend money and employ people as it might seem. Carlock has
numerous investment ideas in his report (stuff like brownfield restoration and tree-
planting), but even if enough ideas can be found, administration, which would be spread
out in state offices and community centers across the country, remains daunting.
“The idea that thousands of administrations across the country will be able to usefully
employ random flows of labor with random sets of skills in random durations is fairly
implausible,” argues Bruenig.
Gunn-Wright notes that there are many paths to a jobs guarantee, some incremental. Both
the jobs and investment pieces could be phased in, expanded through testing and
experimentation. “Pilot and scale,” Carlock says.
Still, at the very least, there’s a good bit of policy work ahead for this (politically central)
element of the plan to become practicable legislation.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 25/40
A poster advertising Social Security benefits.
3) The plan must include a just transition.
Several people I talked to stressed that they want to avoid the mistakes of the original New
Deal, many elements of which entrenched or exacerbated racial inequalities. Everyone
wants to make sure that the plan includes protections for those hardest hit by historical
discrimination and those set to suffer most from the effects of climate change — in
Ocasio-Cortez’s document, “low-income communities, communities of color, indigenous
| Wikipedia
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 26/40
communities, [and] the front-line communities most affected by climate change, pollution,
and other environmental harm.”
Part of that is workforce training and the job guarantee, part of it is ensuring that all those
jobs come with strong labor, environmental, and nondiscrimination standards, part of it is
investments in those communities to fund programs like lead remediation, and part of it is
making sure that all the investments — that all parts of the GND — follow strong
environmental-justice standards.
Beyond these three core principles, the GND is still capacious enough to include a wide
variety of preferences and perspectives. Journalist Aronoff best expresses the maximum,
self-avowedly socialist version, painting an idyllic picture of a family provisioned with
publicly funded work, child care benefits, and elder care. The Sierra Club has a somewhat
more modest version.
As the GND brand spreads, traditional advocacy and policy groups are likely to break off
more manageable chunks under the same rubric. After all, the GND is so sweeping that
virtually any climate policy can claim to be part of it.
The delicate dance is to keep the GND fuzzy enough to allow a broad coalition of people
and interests to see themselves in it — which is, somewhat miraculously, what seems to
have happened so far — while specifying it enough to avoid having it watered down into a
feel-good buzzword.
And that has to be done while navigating all the prodigious challenges ahead.
The top three challenges facing the GND: paying for it, convincing the public, and winning over Democrats
As you’ve probably gathered by now, the GND is much more ambitious than most policy
ideas that have been bouncing around Washington, DC, the past few decades. Moving it
from idea to legislation will involve overcoming obstacles almost too numerous to list.
Because the GND is, at its core, an argument for radical change, it is certain to inspire
reaction — a defense of the status quo. And as Albert Hirschman wrote in his 1991 book
The Rhetoric of Reaction, the arguments will cluster around the three core reactionary
themes (quoting Hirschman): “futility — the claim that all attempts at social engineering
are powerless to alter the natural order of things; perversity — the argument that
interventions will actually backfire and have the opposite of their intended effect; and
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 27/40
jeopardy — the idea that a new, possibly more radical reform will threaten older, hard won
liberal reforms.”
Those arguments will take innumerable forms. I will focus on one key question the
movement must answer and two key constituencies it must win over.
1) “How are you going to pay for it?”
The first and most persistent question facing any social reform in the US is how it will pay
for itself. The right has spent more than half a century in the US waging a propaganda
campaign intended to convince Americans of a few key things: 1) the federal budget must
be balanced, with every dollar spent “paid for” with a dollar of revenue raised, lest inflation
destroy us all; 2) taxes are high and burdensome and any effort to raise taxes is, de facto,
bad; 3) government is incompetent and its spending is always wasteful; and 4) America is
broke, in debt, with crippling liabilities coming due soon.
To be clear, all four are false. They are pernicious myths, motivated by the desire to prevent
progressive social reform. They are, to use a technical term, bullshit.
But they are, nonetheless, widely accepted bullshit that shapes the US political economy.
Indeed, they have been repeated so often, for so long, that they have permeated the
establishments of both parties and shaped the folk political theories of the average
American. Stop a random person on the street and they might not know much about
politics, but they will be certain that the country is in debt and can’t afford nice things.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 28/40
Federal Reserve Board Chair Janet Yellen testifies to Congress. You may roll your eyes at that sign now.
Countering the “pay for it” question can be done in several ways. One, which Ocasio-Cortez
has practiced herself, is to point out the hypocrisy. When Congress funnels trillions to the
military or cuts taxes for the wealthy, no one asks how they will pay for it. Pay-for demands
seem only to apply to Democrats, and only for social spending.
The second is to point out that climate change impacts are going to cost more than climate
mitigation anyway. The GND is big, but “big things will happen,” says Chakrabarti. “The two
options are, either we’re going to intentionally do the big things we want, or big things we
don’t want will happen to us.”
The third is to point out that there are options for raising revenue. There’s a carbon tax,
obviously — the GND movement is opposed to carbon pricing-only strategies, but they all
acknowledge a role for pricing — but Gunn-Wright also mentions a financial transactions
tax and pulling some of the returns of large government investments back in as revenue.
More recently, in an interview with 60 Minutes, Ocasio-Cortez mentioned restoring
income tax rates of up to 70 percent on the ultra-wealthy as a way of raising revenue. “That
doesn’t mean all $10 million are taxed at an extremely high rate, but it means that as you
climb up this ladder you should be contributing more,” she told Anderson Cooper.
The fourth, and boldest, is to reject the question entirely.
| Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 29/40
There is great enthusiasm on the left right now for Modern Monetary Theory and related
ideas and scholars. (Vox’s Dylan Matthews wrote a great explainer on Modern Monetary
Theory a few years ago, and another more recently about Bernie Sanders’s adoption of
the idea.) The core ideas are fairly simple.
If the question is what the US can afford to invest, the way to think about it is not in terms
of how much money the country has. It literally has as much money as it wants. It prints its
own money! (The US has a “fiat currency,” in the lingo.)
The US government can spend all the money it wants. What ultimately sets the limits on
America’s ability to invest are its resources. It has so much labor potential, so much natural
resources, so much manufacturing capacity, etc. By paying for stuff, injecting money into
the economy, the government puts those resources to work.
If the economy overheats, one or more of those resources nears its limits, scarcity drives
prices up and inflation ensues. To stop short of that, the government can pull some money
out, by scaling back programs or raising taxes. Taxes are simply a way of extracting money
from the economy.
Stony Brook University professor Stephanie Kelton (a Modern Monetary Theory guru,
Sanders adviser, and likely GND adviser in some capacity, at some point) calls it an
economy’s natural speed limit. As long as the economy stays under that limit and avoids
inflation, the government can spend more money. A deficit isn’t a bad thing, it’s just a foot
on the accelerator.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 30/40
Stephanie Kelton, professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook University
The notion of balanced federal budgets — which Democrats adopted as their own under
Obama through the absurd “PayGo” rules, and look likely to adopt again next session —
amounts, Kelton says, to a promise: “I’m going to take a dollar out of the economy, usually
in taxes, for every dollar I plan to put in.”
But why would you do that? Why would you slow the economy a bit for every bit you
boosted it?
“If the deficit has to be 4.7 percent of GDP to create the economy we want, with full
employment, low inflation, and poverty going down,” she says, “who cares? If we can
create the economy we want with a deficit of 2.1 percent, that’s fine too. The budget
outcome isn’t the thing that matters, it’s the real economic conditions.”
The way to approach a GND, she says, is to adopt the method of economist John Maynard
Keynes in his book How to Pay for the War: Model the economy’s available resources;
figure out what you can deploy and still avoid inflation; figure out how much private
consumption spending you have to displace to make room for the necessary war
spending; and finally, ensure a just transition, i.e., make sure that the poor and middle
class, the ones deferring their private consumption spending, are rewarded for their
sacrifice. (That’s what US War Bonds were about.)
| Stony Brook University
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 31/40
Winning that argument — convincing Americans that it’s the economy, not the budget, that
needs to be balanced — is an uphill battle, to say the least, lifting a lot of historical baggage.
One way or another, GND proponents will relentlessly face, from both sides of the aisle, the
question: How will you pay for it? Whatever their answer, they had better get it worked out,
because the attacks are already incoming.
2) Winning over the public
GND proponents tout polling showing that majorities of the public support a green job
guarantee and other elements of the GND.
Data for Progress has done extensive polling on a green jobs guarantee. It has found that
a green jobs guarantee outpolls a straight jobs guarantee, especially among young people.
It even brings Trump voters almost (but not quite) up to majority approval.
More recently, the movement has been excited about a recent survey from the Yale
Program on Climate Change Communications, which shows that a GND commands
majority support even from Republicans.
YPCCC
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 32/40
“Green jobs are overwhelmingly popular with voters. This is the future,” says Data for
Progress co-founder Sean McElwee. “The question is not if we get a Green New Deal. We
will have a Green New Deal. The question is how much beautiful socialist bullshit we get
out of it after we wrestle with the Blue Dogs.”
It is true: In terms of public opinion, this is an incredibly strong position from which to start.
The headline features of a GND sound bold and forward-looking and people generally react
well to them.
Nonetheless, having seen countless polls come and go over the years, I have a few rules of
thumb. First, people like good things and will react positively to them in polls. Look at the
Yale survey question: “produce,” “strengthen,” “upgrade,” “provide.” Those are good things.
Of course people want them! They want more health, more benefits, better wages, cleaner
energy.
Conversely, if you poll bad things, like taxes, increased costs, bureaucracy, government
control over private decisions, and wasteful spending, people react badly. (Data for
Progress says it is in the process of testing the green jobs guarantee against negative
framing language.)
People don’t have deep or settled views on most things and generally respond to identity
cues, associations, and above all, messengers. In a poll, you take the messenger out of the
equation and provide carefully curated cues. That tells you almost nothing about how
people will get information or make decisions in the real world.
In the real world, if the GND looks like it has any chance of becoming a reality, it will face a
giant right-wing smear campaign, coordinated across conservative media, think tanks, and
politicians, funded by effectively unlimited fossil fuel wealth. The right will rush to define
the GND as a silly, ridiculous, naive, unaffordable government boondoggle meant to
destroy your way of life and funnel your taxpayer money to Democratic constituencies like
illegal immigrants.
And keep in mind, the right-wing machine does not have to win that messaging battle. It
just has to fight it, furiously, enough to make the GND controversial, to polarize the issue
and freeze it in the same paralysis that grips the rest of US politics.
As Joe Romm of ClimateProgress points out, the most important finding in the survey is
this one:
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 33/40
Virtually no one has heard of the GND. Right now, in the minds of the vast majority of
Americans, “GND” signifies almost nothing. The task of defining it for them lies entirely
ahead.
Advocates will work to define it with positive imagery. But they will not have the field to
themselves. And they will likely never have access to the kind of money fossil fuels can
spend to crush them. If they win the messaging battles to come, it will be with people
power and media savvy.
YPCCC
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 34/40
3) Winning over Democrats
Veteran Democrats like Pelosi and Hoyer came of age in an era in which Democrats were
on the defensive. Bill Clinton won with a “third way,” pledging fealty to markets and an end
to big government. Ever since, Democrats have been backing into progress, moving
incrementally, accepting basic conservative critiques of muscular social democracy.
And as the Republican Party has become more rabidly conservative and corrupt,
congressional Democrats have developed a particular culture. They see themselves as the
Good Guys, the ones who still care about good government, fiscal responsibility, and
bipartisanship. They are loathe to break norms the way the GOP routinely has. They don’t
want to fight dirty.
More than anything, it is that culture of caution and manners with which GND proponents
must contend. The idea of adopting bold policy pledges with no care as to whether they
draw any bipartisan support is deeply alien to congressional Democrats. They live in fear of
Republican attacks, which are faithfully echoed throughout DC media. They don’t want to
“stick their heads up” or “give Republicans ammunition.” They are hoping, on some level,
that if they keep their heads down and don’t distract anyone, voters will focus on how
much they don’t like Trump.
“Even the most progressive of the progressives suffer from a certain Stockholm syndrome
from living under neoliberalism for 40 years,” says Chakrabarti.
But there is no way to soft-pedal something like the GND. There is no way to pretend that it
is incremental or fully “paid for.” There is no way to pretend that GOP leadership, so deeply
in hock to fossil fuel funding, is going to offer any kind of support for any part of it.
The GND offers Americans a bracing new alternative, not a hesitant step forward — a
rejection of Republican dogma and fossil fuel energy, not a compromise with them. To rally
Americans behind it, Democrats will have to “paint the picture and the vision,” Chakrabarti
says. “You have to sell the American people that this is possible to make it possible.”
Vogue Magazine @voguemagazine
.@sunrisemvmt and @Ocasio2018 are trying to #SealTheDeal on a Select Committee for a #GreenNewDeal this week before the legislative session ends; watch our explainer here.
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 35/40
More than any process or jurisdictional issue, this is the choice that will face Democrats in
coming years: to respond to Trump by promising a return to ordinary politics, or to respond
to Trump by promising to strive for something genuinely new and better.
“What does America get if Dems take power in 2020?” Chakrabarti asks. “Either that can
be a boring, crappy vision that no one’s going to get excited by, or it’s going to be an
exciting vision that people will want to come out and vote for.”
The activists who have kickstarted this unlikely movement are well aware that they are the
underdogs in this fight. The GND “would be a direct blow to some of the wealthiest and
most powerful interests in the world,” says Weber, “and they’re not going to accept it lying
down.”
He knows that tons of fossil fuel money is gearing up to descend on the movement. And he
knows that Democrats will be difficult to rouse. He knows that even if Dems take power in
2020, any legislation will eventually have to contend with the Senate, where the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee will be run by West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, who literally
shot the last climate bill (which was a hell of a lot less ambitious than a GND).
before the legislative session ends; watch our explainer here.
Watch Bria Vinaite Explain the Green New Deal Before you vote in the midterm elections, Bria Vinaite wants you to understand the ideas behind a Green New Deal.
vogue.com
12:45 PM · Dec 13, 2018
740 224 people are Tweeting about this
7/9/2020 The Green New Deal, explained - Vox
https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez 36/40
“Even if we get the politics right, I still think that we’re going to need sustained mass
protest, extended labor shutdowns, and general strikes to begin as soon as possible after
Election Day 2020,” says Weber. “That’s going to take convincing the American people that
this is an absolute moral and economic necessity, and the only thing standing in the way of
it happening is the political class.”
It is a long shot. But as the IPCC has made clear, long shots are the only shots left. It is not
the elderly members of Congress who will live with the havoc forecast by climate
scientists, it is the young activists who are amassing on their doorsteps and in their offices.
Those young activists are looking ahead further than the next election cycle. Their families
will suffer the consequences of these choices.
But they believe that history is on their side. “The most powerful force known to humans is
ideology,” says McElwee. Republicans have pushed through “radically unpopular policies
because of their commitment to ideology.” But today, he says, “young people have the
ideas that people want to be associated with. We shape ideology and that’s incredibly
fucking powerful.”
Climate politics is, now as ever, a choice between changes that seem impossible and a
future that seems unthinkable. For years, US politics has denied and avoided that choice.
In their own way, Democrats — the “adults” who want to reserve the power to make these
decisions — have avoided it just like Republicans.
Facing it squarely means radicalism. Now, a real response to climate change, a response on
the scale of what the crisis demands, is on the table. It is an option. It has a name.
Whether America can work its way past polarization, paralysis, and structural barriers to
change to actually grasp that option, to take a leap into a new future, very much remains to
be seen. But there can be no more ignoring the choice.
TOP ARTICLES 1/5
