Republicans’ Green New Deal-Lite Is Political Suicide

Opinion by James Taylor

When democratic socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) formally introduced a congressional resolution for a “Green New Deal,” Republicans were handed a powerful, unexpected political gift. Leave it to weak-minded congressional Republicans to find a way to screw it up.

The Green New Deal would re-make the United States via a “new national, social, industrial, and economic mobilization on a scale not seen since World War II and the New Deal.” Those aren’t just empty words. The free-market American Action Forum conducted an economic analysis of the Green New Deal and found it would cost as much as $94 trillion, or approximately $780,000 per U.S. household. The green-energy components alone would cost as much as $12.3 trillion.

Ocasio-Cortez’s asserted justification for the Green New Deal is a mythical U.S.-caused global warming crisis. She and Al Gore tell us the “science is settled,” yet global temperatures have risen less than half as much as U.N. climate models predicted, and almost exactly by as much as global warming “skeptics” have long predicted.

Moreover, during the past 150 years, as Earth emerged from the Little Ice Age, the warming climate has brought immeasurable benefits that continue today, including record crop yields, a significant increase in global plant life, and a reduction in persistently cool temperatures that kill 20 times more people than higher temperatures. At the same time, extreme weather and climate events have become less frequent and severe in recent decades.

Despite all this, a small number of congressional Republicans are vigorously pushing a Green New Deal-Lite. A Green New Deal is a wonderful thing, they say, so long as we just moderate it a little bit. Showing little daylight between themselves and Gore on climate alarmism, this cadre of Republicans is attempting to sell out President Donald Trump and his conservative voting base on the signature political issue of the day.

Just how foolish can these Republicans be? Much has been made of the 2018 midterm elections, but the most impactful lesson is that Republicans commit political suicide by embracing climate alarmism. Of the 198 House Republicans who didn’t belong to the congressional Climate Solutions Caucus, 177 (89 percent) of those seats remained Republican after the election. Of the 43 House Republicans belonging to the Climate Solutions Caucus, just 23 (53 percent) of those seats remained in Republican hands. Republicans who stayed true to their conservative base fared quite well in the midterms, while Republicans who sided with Gore on climate alarmism lost support from their political base.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)—is drafting a “Green Real Deal” as a 10-percent-less alternative to Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) is calling for a “Manhattan Project” to force Americans to utilize expensive, unreliable energy sources.

The biggest difference between Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal and Alexander’s “New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy” is that Ocasio-Cortez calls for a “moon shot” program and Alexander calls for a “Manhattan Project.” Big deal.

While Gaetz and Alexander claim to offer a better version of Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal, the asserted differences are mere window dressing. Gaetz and Alexander emphasize that they would be more willing than Ocasio-Cortez to include nuclear power as part of their proposals.

Yet when the American Action Forum determined the Green New Deal’s energy components would cost Americans $12.3 trillion, AAF was already giving the Green New Deal the economic benefit of having nuclear power as a core component. Gaetz and Alexander’s Green Real Deal would still impose new government programs costing at least $8.1 trillion, or $68,000 per American household. By comparison, the entire federal budget in the 2017–18 fiscal year was merely $4.1 trillion.

Ultimately, Gaetz, Alexander, and their small cadre of Republican climate alarmists are seeking to undermine the conservative Republican voter base and Trump on one of his most important policy principles. Their betrayal of Trump and the conservative Republican base will almost certainly—and justly—come back to haunt them.

James Taylor is senior fellow for energy and environment policy at The Heartland Institute.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joel Snider
April 17, 2019 8:03 am

This is EXACTLY the kind of garbage that has defined the Republican’s for the last thirty years – and EXACTLY why Trump was elected.

Reply to  Joel Snider
April 17, 2019 8:16 am

…you bet…how do you tell the difference between a republican and a democrat?

you can’t..and that’s why both sides are out to get Trump

Reply to  Latitude
April 17, 2019 9:27 am

He’s losing his base now. “drain the swamp, lock her up” etc.. followed by “I was only joking”.

His latest XO gives him authority over pipelines and power transmission lines transiting canadian and mexican borders.

The Inerdrola/CMP line from Quebec is called the clean power connect that sends hydro and wind to Massachusetts. This opened the door for at least 8 giant wind farms in remote and scenic Maine to be spoiled by virtue of Massachusetts legislative mandates imposed upon the great people and landscape of Maine, even though 98% of the affected people there OPPOSE IT and go NO benefit.

We conservatives wont be “joking” in 2020. The Republicans better get a good candidate or the Dem’s win.

We take “joking” seriously.

Bryan A
Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 10:17 am

Perhaps the US could seek payments from the vaunted Climate Reparations funds in order to “Clean Up'” their act??

Robert W Turner
Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 10:22 am

Eh, his poll numbers are at an all time high. Barr just opened a new investigation. Maine’s decision to build wind farms has nothing to do with the federal government or Trump. You seem like the type of R that the previous posts are alluding to.

Reply to  Robert W Turner
April 17, 2019 10:40 am

Kushner RE is doing a lot of land and finance deals there now.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Robert W Turner
April 17, 2019 11:25 am

Kushner’s married to Ivanka – she’s a greenie.

Try taking in the big picture. And perhaps you can find something Trump’s done to advance OUR front.

Jon Scott
Reply to  Robert W Turner
April 18, 2019 12:40 am

Maines decision is not based on any credible science for sure except possibly for social “science”.

Joel Snider
Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 10:38 am

I don’t see Trump’s losing his base – I for one am willing to let Trump be Trump and do his thing. At this point there’s so many rats in the woodpile, it’s difficult to make any move that’s won’t exploited or perverted.

And for any ‘conservatives’ who feel like being pious, y’all better recognize.
Obama was in the process of finalizing a permanent power-base – and without Trump it would have been done by now – AND all the dominos are still in place.
Part of the swamp was drained when forty-odd RINOs abdicated the house, in an attempt to hand congress over to the Dems, and but for Trump’s campaigning, they would now OWN congress.

The next few elections are ALL going to be the most important ever – and if you’re thinking of sitting it out on your high-horse, think about what it might be like to be a criminal offense to simply be YOU.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 18, 2019 5:03 am

“I don’t see Trump’s losing his base – I for one am willing to let Trump be Trump and do his thing.”

Trump has held on to an 80+ percent favorable rating from Republicans since he was elected and through all the attacks by the Democrats, and now that the Mueller report has exonerated Trump, his approval rating among Republicans is up to 93 percent in the last poll.

Trump is definitely NOT losing his base.

Trump has also increased his support among Blacks and Hispanics by about 50 percent since the 2016 election.

The Economy is on a big roll.

Trump wins in 2020.

Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 10:51 am

Who is this, Bill Kristol? Your ship has sailed, NeverTrumpers.

But you’ll get a chance to choose in 2020 – Trump, or Socialism.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 12:28 pm

John – April 17, 2019 at 9:27 am

He’s losing his base now. “drain the swamp, lock her up” etc.. followed by “I was only joking”.

We conservatives wont be “joking” in 2020. The Republicans better get a good candidate or the Dem’s win.

We take “joking” seriously.

John, you sound just like all the other Democrat “talking heads”. Only difference being, you can claim to be a conservative or a Tea Partier or even a John Bircher …… and get by with it with some people …. when you don’t have to face your audience. What next you gonna tell them, that they are “gonna lose their vote”. That always scares the bejesus out of conservatives and republicans, right?

Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 17, 2019 3:23 pm

I am a lifelong conservative. No 3rd party affiliation.

I know many friends and their associates who regret the choices we had but vitingbfir the lesser evil is still the same as being served a plate of unappetizing material (if you get my drift). abd paying too dollar then telling the waiter it was delicious.’

I tell it as it is without apology. I can’t change the facts or reality of the situation.

This isn’t 3 d chess as some claim. It’s reality.

Science has been co-opted by cultist belief as has been solidly demonstrated here.

Even in Trump’s case, he will cave for political expedience and as is heard on the chamber floor “and for other purposes”.

I’d even go out on a limb here and mention another foreign country, but will refrain but many know and will speak not of it but know it in their hearts and soul.

Science is not political nor religious. It’s based on fact and valid irrefutable testing.

Compromise is not an option.

Neither is “joking”.

Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 5:34 pm

“I am a lifelong conservative. No 3rd party affiliation.” That sentence alone tells the world what you are. Bubye, Felicia.

Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 17, 2019 3:58 pm

Apologies for profuse grammatical errors. They were supposed to be colorful and (redacted) adjectives.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 17, 2019 4:16 pm

John – I would hate to be stuck in a fox hole with you.

I would suggest you take a second look at reality.

Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 17, 2019 4:33 pm

To be frankly honest, you wouldn’t be stuck in a foxhole with me because you’d have to earn your keep.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 18, 2019 3:54 am

John – April 17, 2019 at 3:23 pm

Even in Trump’s case, he will cave for political expedience and as is heard on the chamber floor “and for other purposes”..

John, the POTUS is not a Dictator or a Roman Emperor,…… nor does he have 100% control of the military that will do whatever he mandates, ….. therefore he has to “cave” fairly often.

Dr Deanster
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 18, 2019 5:44 am

John …. you seem to project the behavior of Politicians onto Trump, when he is not. Trump won’t cave …. Trump will continue to push for the founding principles of the Constitution, and swamp dwelling politicians will continue to push back. You may not like Trump the person, but … As you say …. facts are facts.

The US law on immigration was put in place before Trump, he is just enforcing it. It is bad, contradictory law, he has requested congress change it ….. your guys refuse.

Your guys predicted the economy would tank under Trump. It didn’t, and in fact soared.

Your guys were confident Trump colluded with Russia, Mueller, 2 yrs of investigation and 25 million dollars says otherwise.

It is a fact that there is no empiric evidence to support the CO2 meme … only opinion. As such the null hypothesis has never been rejected.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
April 18, 2019 8:11 am

‘To be frankly honest, you wouldn’t be stuck in a foxhole with me because you’d have to earn your keep.’

You seem to be the one lacking any sort of fortitude. Have you got any idea what Trump’s been up against? His fortune, his family, his life?

I’ll tell you what Trump’s got – they’re about twelve pounds each and they’re made of brass.

And you’ve got the sheer GALL to make a comment like that?

And as far as ME earning my keep – trust me, you have NO idea.

Reply to  john
April 17, 2019 5:28 pm

Wow, the crybaby butthurt is strong in this one. Let me help you out, sweety, your hero Shrillery lost, America won, get over it, whiner. Donald Trump loves you, and there is not a damned thing you can do about it. MAGA!

Joel Snider
Reply to  2hotel9
April 18, 2019 8:22 am

Yeah, John’s just shown us what the ‘weak link’ looks like.

Bill Powers
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 17, 2019 8:24 am

It illustrates the very reason that they call the Democrats the Evil Party and Republicans the Stupid Party.

I have observed for decades the Democrats assign some carnival barker to run way over to the left with a direct assist from the primary media outlets and then predictably the Republicans counter propose some asinine legislation to the left of center which is easily passed and then walk around congratulating themselves.

All the while the Democrats are slapping them on the back in congratulatory fashion leaving “Look at me. I’m so Stoopid” signs taped to their backs. Meanwhile the Dems have already begun plotting their next strategy to move the Republicans further left of their newly established leftist position and the Republicans are clueless.

Reply to  Bill Powers
April 17, 2019 8:28 am

…chipping away in little increments all the time

Reply to  Latitude
April 17, 2019 9:16 am

Ultimately, there are only two kinds of people on planet Earth, skeptics of AGW, and those who would become skeptics after objectively reading material from skeptic climate scientists and from places like WUWT, ClimateDepot, etc. Gaetz is just one in that last group. Not for lack of trying to inform him about the skeptic side on my part, though — I’m not a Florida resident, so I couldn’t contact his office via their online form, but I instead found the address for his Chief of Staff Jillian Lane Wyant and sent her an email, after seeing the prior WUWT 3/25 post ( ) on Gaetz’ New Green Problem.

Reply to  Bill Powers
April 18, 2019 9:59 am

“the Democrats the Evil Party and Republicans the Stupid Party” Dang! That is such a great description, yet I’ve never heard it before.
Thank you, Bill, for cutting to the heart of the reality.

Reply to  Joel Snider
April 17, 2019 8:25 am

The Republican leadership is only interested in winning, so that they can be the ones directing tax money to their friends.
Decades ago, they determined that the secret to success was to position the party just slightly to the right of where ever the Democrats position themselves.

Reply to  MarkW
April 17, 2019 8:32 am

…while the democrats start out so far left they can’t even see daylight
and slowly gravitate a little back….tricking people every time

If you only want $1…start out asking for $1000

It works for them every time

Reply to  MarkW
April 18, 2019 10:03 am

MarkW – I’ve often said the GOP is just envious of how much graft Democrats get, and how they would like to change it so they get a bigger share of it. But like Bill says, they just aren’t smart enough, or competent enough, or they’re just too lazy.
Fortunately, in the last election we threw out a lot of those kinds of Republicans. Unfortunately, there’s a long way to go.

Carbon Bigfoot
Reply to  Joel Snider
April 17, 2019 9:09 am

AMEN +++++

Reply to  Joel Snider
April 18, 2019 7:30 am

Lamar Alexander is retiring. He’s going as a Democrat on his way out. He voted against the national emergency to build the wall, but calls this an emergency. Priorities.

April 17, 2019 8:03 am

All “New Deals” are Red New Deals, by definition. The term assumes a reshuffling of the socioeconomic “deck” by an all-powerful, all-wise and all-benevolent Dealer. IOW, the State as God.

The babbling, bug-eyed bartender from the Bronx isn’t the only fool on the Hill.

April 17, 2019 8:04 am

How the #$^@&% did Lamar Alexander survive his last election. He is way to the left of most of Tennessee on not just climate change, but just about every other issue on earth as well

Tom Abbott
Reply to  OweninGA
April 17, 2019 10:07 am

Alexander and a lot of other Republicans need to be voted out of office at the next opportunity. Something like about 10 Republican senators and about 20 Republcan House members.

Conservatives shouldn’t put up with these RINO’smasquerading as conservatives. Vote them out! Get someone in there with a little more sense.

Are you listening, Ronna? I like Ronna. I bet she is listening. Not necessarily to me, but to herself. She seems to have very good political instincts. Ronna, we need to get rid of these RINO’s. I know Mitt is your uncle, but he won’t be up for reelection next time, so you can ignore him for the 2020 election. But go after those other RINO’s! Find conservatives some suitable replacements. You have plenty of time.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 17, 2019 9:36 pm

Ronna’s henchmen have called me repeatedly asking that I sign up, donate, support, vote, yada, yada! Each time I ask them if the RNC helped Mutt get elected, and after some backtracking, mealy-mouthed apologies, and obfuscation, admit they did! Then I ask them why I should support a party organ that fights against Trump and they try to ignore the obvious conflict! I tell them when they get rid of Mutt and a few others like him, to call again!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  RockyRoad
April 18, 2019 5:13 am

Unfortunately, Mitt will be around until 2024.

My opinion of him sure has changed, and not in a good way.

But don’t make the mistake of thinking Ronna is Mitt’s puppet. She is definitely a staunch Trump supporter. It must be really conflicting for her to have to deal with an obstructionist uncle Mitt.

April 17, 2019 8:08 am


April 17, 2019 8:08 am

When Democrats propose incredibly stupid things like the Green New Deal, Republicans who oppose it are asked what their plan is. The implicit assumption is the climate crisis real and now we are just discussing which Green New Deal. It’s nice to know that our politicians think they can control the climate. Bad to know that they don’t have the guts to say how silly that idea is.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Bob Greene
April 17, 2019 10:04 am

Basically, the Democrats want to do it, and it’s apparently the job of the Republican enablers to figure out how.
Never question whether it needs, or SHOULD be done at all.

April 17, 2019 8:12 am

The is no such thin as a “New Deal”. Even a “Green” one.
In 1939, Pulitzer-winning journalist H.J. Haskell published:
“The New Deal in Old Rome”
It can be read on the internet and it is worth reading.

Steve O
April 17, 2019 8:16 am

Either they’re stupid idiots who fell for a very basic ploy, or they share the same ideological aims as the Democrats.

There is no reason to think that the Green New Deal is a serious proposal. Its purpose is to establish a ridiculous, pie-in-the-sky reference point from which to begin negotiating. That’s why the ideas were floated by a naive and expendable politician — AOC. If Republicans want to negotiate their way to a reasonable middle ground, then the corresponding offer Republicans should make is to set all the coal mines on fire.

Reply to  Steve O
April 17, 2019 8:25 am

The best ‘negotiation’ response to negate the GND is to set a policy course agenda in exactly the opposite direction.

Negotiate that.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Steve O
April 17, 2019 10:17 am

“Either they’re stupid idiots who fell for a very basic ploy, or they share the same ideological aims as the Democrats.”

I think some people are just overly influenced by propaganda. Even Republicans. They hear something repeated often enough as being true and they start thinking it is.

It’s much easier to assume Humans are causing the climate to change than to take the position that we are not, because if you accept the CAGW narrative you don’t have to really know much technical data so you can just parrot the meme, whereas, if you don’t agree with the narrative, then you better have all your facts lined up like ducks in a row because you are going to be challenged to refute the CAGW speculation every time it is brought up, and there are not all that many politicians who can do such a thing. So they take the easy way out, maybe because they believe the memet, or maybe because it’s just the easy way out.

Anyway, any Repubican who claims humans are causing the climate to change should get lots of CAGW-challenging letters from their constituents.

April 17, 2019 8:16 am

Exactly what any rational person has come to expect from Republican “leaders”, betrayal. Simply voting people out is not sufficient level of punishment to drive these backstabbers out of our government.

April 17, 2019 8:25 am

Back away from the stupid and no one will get hurt. Nice and easy now.

April 17, 2019 8:26 am

Let us be rid of politicians, fools, and evil doers.
But, I repeat myself.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Robot_B9
April 17, 2019 9:14 am

What would we be left with, then? Government by a New Man? Humans without human failings?

michael hart
April 17, 2019 8:26 am

What they really need to do is make some, slightly silly if necessary, promises conditional on building out a large nuclear fleet first. Promise them the silly expensive stuff later because by then climate disaster will still not have appeared and many may have returned to their senses.

The green scam continuously relies on trying to frighten people into doing something stupid immediately, and repenting at leisure. We need to try and get them to agree to something which is atually the reverse, knowing that the stupid bit will get cancelled.

April 17, 2019 8:32 am

AOC is actually an Eco-Marxist and anyone supporting the “Green New Deal” or anything similar is guilty of trying to destroy the United States! To put it bluntly, such people should be charged with sedition or the more serious crime of treason! Certainly advocating for Marxist revolution, using the Climate Change meme as an excuse, should cause the removal of any government official that has taken an oath to support and protect the constitution! It has been said jokingly that the Green New Deal is the longest suicide note ever written, and in typical memetric fashion, humor is used to reveal the actual impact such bone-headed ideas would have!

Reply to  RockyRoad
April 17, 2019 11:10 am

People like her are best termed “watermelons”: Green on the outside, (Marxist) Red on the inside.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Don
April 17, 2019 6:49 pm

I like Sir Monckton’s “traffic light” analogy:

They say they’re GREEN,
But they’re too YELLOW
To admit they’re RED

April 17, 2019 8:32 am

If these Republicans don’t represent mainstream opinion in their districts, they can be challenged in primaries. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to work?

John Endicott
Reply to  Adam
April 17, 2019 9:05 am

Yes. However, it’s not easy to unseat an incumbent (that’s not to say it’s impossible). Incumbents tend to have financial (they’ve already got big donors lined up) and tactical (they’ve already got a large election apparatus in place) advantages as well as name recognition (Joe and Jane voter go to the polls and see several candidates listed but only recognize the name of the incumbent, chances are they’ll go with the devil they know). Any challenger has to work much harder to have a hope of winning. It can, and has, been done but it doesn’t happen often (how else do you think these RINOs keep getting re-elected despite taking positions that are not in line with the views of the majority of their constituents).

Reply to  John Endicott
April 17, 2019 12:26 pm

Which is why incumbents always favor campaign spending limits.
It takes money to over come the advantages of incumbancy. If you can guarantee that any opponent can’t outspend you, you can pretty much guarantee that you will never be beaten.

JRF in Pensacola
Reply to  Adam
April 17, 2019 10:22 pm

I live in Matt Gaetz’s district and receive periodic emails about issues of the day and when I received his thoughts about the GRD which included the military’s concern about climate change and the deficiencies of the AOC GND, I responded with the typical comments about “unsettled science”, it may be warming but how much is actually caused by man and a little warming has been beneficial, etc. I received a reply (standard, I’m sure) which reiterated the first email’s talking points and included more of the military’s concern (and, remember, his District includes a lot of military infrastructure). I sent another reply, thanking him for his reply to my first email, and suggested that he pay heed to the President’s desire (at least his reported desire) to gather a group of scientists to review the NCA and IPCC reports and mentioned some of the possible names such as Spencer, Curry, Lindzen, etc. In other words, “slow your roll”, young’in.

What bothered me was the perception of acquiescence to the “reality” of man-induced climate change (his emails say “climate change is real”, which, of course, it is, but how much is natural versus caused by man). Accepting AOC’s premise but proposing a slightly different remedy is simply letting the camel’s nose under the tent.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I voted for Gaetz as an independent and will probably vote for him again but I hope he is more restrained in his fervor to combat climate change in the future.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  JRF in Pensacola
April 18, 2019 5:27 am

“and when I received his thoughts about the GRD which included the military’s concern about climate change”

The people running the U.S. military aren’t stupid. They aren’t fooled by the CAGW narrative.

What has happened is Obama appointees to the military are pushing the CAGW narrative, not the regular military.

So when Gaetz uses military concerns as a reason to take CAGW seriously, he should know that he is only talking about a few people in the military who have a political CAGW agenda to promote. He shouldn’t put too much weight on their biased position.

The Obama appointees are still in positions of power in the government. One reason is the Democrats in the Senate have been holding up Trump’s appointments and dragging them out for as long as they can. It’s sedition.

David LeBlanc
April 17, 2019 8:38 am

The Stupid Party doing what it does best, letting the left lead the way and being stupid.

Rich Davis
Reply to  David LeBlanc
April 17, 2019 7:57 pm

And then there’s that Masshole turd William Weld with his primary challenge to Trump.

Who would vote for that?


Tom Abbott
Reply to  Rich Davis
April 18, 2019 5:30 am

“Who would vote for that?”


William Weld is just going to make a fool of himself. Like he did in 2016 when he ran against Trump as an independent.

Joel O'Bryan
April 17, 2019 8:42 am

Those RINOs are ripe for getting “primaried.”

Even AO-C will likely get serious Democrat challenger in her primary. After her little Amazon stunt that displayed her abject economic illiteracy, she is vulnerable as many people in her district understand it is good paying jobs and economic security, not a meager welfare check, is what they want.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
April 17, 2019 9:40 pm

AOC also has a Republican challenger to contend with, too! I’d love to see that district flip Republican in reaction to the absolutely brain-dead Green New Deal!

April 17, 2019 8:43 am

Progressives have infested the Republican Party since Teddy Roosevelt. These are socialists who believe in powerful central government, and maintaining their own elite status. Those are the “Country Club” Republicans I have hated all my life. They are at odds with the founding principles of the Party. I will never donate to the RNC or any other national Republican Committee as long as Progressives run the Party, and redirect donations from fighting Democrats to fighting conservative Republicans in primary elections. Instead, I donate to local candidates. Starve out the Progressives!

April 17, 2019 8:45 am

Lamar Alexander has been a weight on Tennesseans backs for many years. In his dotage he is calling for a “Manhattan Project” because he’s a member of the old shoeless, toothless Nuclear Hillbilly crowd centered around Oak Ridge National Laboratory. “What’s good for Oak Ridge is good for the country” you might say. His mentor Howard Baker was of the same mind. They absolutely believe they are soaking the national taxpayer for the benefit of their East Tennessee power base. If it became a thing to burn crickets to produce energy they would sponsor a funding bill to test the concept at Oak Ridge.

Former Massachusetts Senator Bill Weld recently announced for the GOP Presidential nomination. He’s their man and has been forever. They don’t expect to win. Just to syphon off votes and muddy the real Republican message.

martin weiss
April 17, 2019 8:47 am

no link to any actual proposal so how would anyone know what the green deal lite is

John Endicott
Reply to  martin weiss
April 17, 2019 9:08 am

Doesn’t matter, the fact that there even is a green deal lite is damning enough all on it’s own. The best response to the green new deal isn’t to come up with a lite-version, rather it’s to totally repudiate it for the garbage that it is.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John Endicott
April 17, 2019 10:23 am

“The best response to the green new deal isn’t to come up with a lite-version, rather it’s to totally repudiate it for the garbage that it is.”

John has the right idea.

It will be interesting to see the reaction if these Republicans ever do introduce a New Green Deal Lite.

I know one thing: President Trump isn’t going to buy it. He’ll be making fun of these stupid Republicans just like he does AOC.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 17, 2019 11:52 am

If it is introduced, it would be nice to see it moved forward to a vote.

The outcome would be similar to the last one … no support & most people running away.

Gary Pearse
April 17, 2019 8:48 am

Where is the RNC? Don’t they get it? Trump’s politics is exactly the medicine the party needed. I thought the rebirth of the R was secured, especially with the Dems wasting these last couple of yrs trying to change the election results and not having a retrospective on what went wrong.

The midterms took me by surprise. I have been touting a forecast that the Republicans would be in power for ar least a generation until the Dem old guard are gone and new blood figured out that their (Eurocentric) constituency is a global one and the people they shun, ridicule and dispossess are those who hold to the very things that made America the envy of the world. Doesn’t the RNC have any way to filter canditature? Are they still mired in the swamp?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 17, 2019 10:31 am

“Where is the RNC? Don’t they get it? Trump’s politics is exactly the medicine the party needed.”

Ronna McDaniel, the head of the RNC, is a staunch supporter of President Trump. I have a lot of confidence in her pushing for Trump’s agenda.

The way to find out which Republicans to vote out of office next time is to note whether they have supported Trump’s agenda or opposed Trump’s agenda. Those who oppose Trump’s agenda should be voted out of office.

Trump’s agenda is the conservative agenda. Republican politicians who don’t support Trump, don’t support the conservative agenda. It’s as simple as that.

We haven’t had anything as conservative as Trump since Reagan. Lot’s of RINOs opposed Reagan, too. Reagan prevailed over them. We need to help Trump prevail over our current set of self-serving, damn-the-country RINOs.

April 17, 2019 8:52 am

The RINO’s are trying to get the nose of the camel under the tent flap, so they can bring in carbon tax. Just as the voters in Canada are putting people in place to get rid of it.

April 17, 2019 8:55 am

Democrats are trying to establish the framing, If the Repubs don’t have the sense to reject their framing and develop their own framing, then the Dems will win. Establish the framing and get your opponent to accept that framing, then you will win because the framing determines the outcomes. Both Graetz and Alexander need to be primaried in 2020.

April 17, 2019 8:57 am

‘impactful’ must be one of ugliest words that have been invented in recent years.

April 17, 2019 9:02 am

“This is EXACTLY the kind of garbage that has defined the Republican’s for the last thirty years – and EXACTLY why Trump was elected.” +1M and needs to be repeated over and over.

April 17, 2019 9:08 am


April 17, 2019 9:09 am

Nothing like a circular firing squad.

April 17, 2019 9:18 am

David Brower Quote:
Brower described the increasingly radical arch of his professional career to E magazine:

The Sierra Club made the Nature Conservancy look reasonable. I founded Friends of the Earth to make the Sierra Club look reasonable. Then I founded Earth Island Institute to make Friends of the Earth look reasonable. Earth First! now makes us look reasonable. We’re still waiting for someone else to come along and make Earth First! look reasonable.

Well now we have AOC to make Earth First look reasonable!

David S
April 17, 2019 9:36 am

This is why I voted 3rd party in the last 6 presidential elections. People say its a wasted vote but I say its a waste to vote for either of the main party crooks who you really don’t want.

Reply to  David S
April 17, 2019 9:43 pm

I support President Trump 100%!

Berndt Koch
April 17, 2019 10:07 am

Won’t this be the obvious outcome of a two party system especially with people registering for D or R?

Is either/or really a choice?

Is now a good time for a sensible centrist party to be formed?

Maybe I shot down my own thoughts by using the word sensible…

D. Anderson
April 17, 2019 10:14 am

These RINOS think if they just put the word “Market” into the proposal we will all roll over and ask them to rub our tummies.

Doesn’t matter to them that most people are only in the “market” because there is a government gun to your head.

April 17, 2019 10:52 am

It might help to start with the actual GOP proposal…

‘Green Real Deal’ project ideas:

  1. Investing in carbon capture storage and carbon capture and use, and otherwise reducing emissions or achieving net-zero emissions from energy produced from fossil fuels
  2. Investing in next generation zero-emissions sources, including renewable energy and nuclear energy, especially small modular reactors
  3. Promoting the widespread use and deployment of next-generation recycling and waste management technology, such as plastics-to-fuel initiatives, and transforming post-consumer recycled plastic into new materials such as asphalt
  4. Modernizing the electric grid through strategic investments in transmission, distribution and storage
  5. Allowing fair and equal access to energy development on federal lands
  6. Modernizing the implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act to drive investment in clean energy infrastructure, especially multi-state transmission, and offshore wind
  7. Eliminating regulations that hinder or slow the deployment of advanced energy, and creating a regulatory climate to encourage the use of clean, renewable and innovative energy and recycling technology,
  8. Modernizing regulations governing hydropower development
  9. Establishing a voluntary framework reporting and tracking carbon emissions, renewable energy procurement, and energy efficiency investment to increase investment in clean energy technology and improve transparency and accountability for the benefit of customers, investors and shareholders
  10. Establishing robust homeowner tax incentives for energy efficiency upgrades, including HVAC upgrades
  11. Expanding tax incentives for commercial building energy efficiency upgrades
  12. Establishing challenge grants for universities to develop actionable plans for increasing resiliency and building adaptive capacity in urban and rural areas, as well as in national parks and other federal lands
  13. Working with utility companies and developers to ensure the speedy yet realistic and consumer-friendly adoption of renewable energy including solar, wind and geothermal
  14. Protecting the intellectual property of American clean energy innovators

Pensacola News Journal

Reply to  David Middleton
April 17, 2019 11:18 am

Whoo! so conservative you’d hardly know it had happened…

Reply to  griff
April 17, 2019 11:23 am

There’s not much in it for even me to disagree with.

John Endicott
Reply to  David Middleton
April 17, 2019 11:31 am

I don’t know, David. There’s quite a bit to disagree with. Starting with #1 being a waste of time and resources, and continuing with the fact that wherever it says “investing” what it really means is “wasting taxpayer money on”. And that’s just for starters.

Reply to  John Endicott
April 17, 2019 11:49 am

Investing in carbon capture storage and carbon capture and use, and otherwise reducing emissions or achieving net-zero emissions from energy produced from fossil fuels

Use = enhanced oil recovery

Reply to  John Endicott
April 17, 2019 12:31 pm

First off, you ignore the carbon capture and storage part.
As for the carbon capture and use portion, we don’t need the federal government investing in something private enterprises are already doing.

Reply to  MarkW
April 17, 2019 1:01 pm

Everyone is ignoring CCS without the U because it has no value. The only way to prolong coal-fired power plants is through carbon capture; which will only happen if the captured CO2 has tangible value.

The private sector is “already doing” CO2 EOR where it makes economic sense, very large oilfields with cheap access to CO2. To increase CO2 EOR, oil prices have to go up and/or costs have to go down. The Petra Nova project demonstrated that a relatively small “investment” can lower the cost of CO2 EOR.

CO2 EOR increases domestic oil production, maintains or even increases coal-fired power plant utilization and reduces current CO2 emissions. These are all stated objectives of the Trump administration.

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
April 18, 2019 5:26 am

“Everyone is ignoring CCS without the U because it has no value.” = “Starting with #1 being a waste of time and resources,”
As for “Use = enhanced oil recovery” that’s for the oil companies to pay for/deal with *NOT* the government and if it makes economic sense, the oil companies don’t need the government sticking their noses in making it less economical. Remember, we are talking about a government proposal here.

Reply to  David Middleton
April 17, 2019 12:01 pm

items 1, 6, 7, & 9 would be abused.

Similar to the clean water act & endangered species act, it would be abused and used simply as a tool toward means separate from the initial goal.

There is absolutely no reason, in this federation of states, to create a non-specific, but centralized, bunch of crap like this.

Reply to  griff
April 17, 2019 2:50 pm

They could add a ban on clear cutting American forests for burning wood pellets in UK boilers.

Reply to  David Middleton
April 17, 2019 11:27 am

There’s actually some good stuff in there, the problem is that there’s so much “green” crap mixed in there that the whole is unacceptable. A fixed version would look like this:

1. Deleted
2. Delete the part concerning unreliables (aka. “renewables”)
3. Gotta deal with our waste somehow, might as well figure out a way to put it to productive use.
4. “Storage”, at least if it means batteries, is unworkable on the scale needed, so dump that part – the rest is probably a good idea.
5. Keep, definitely.
6. Delete – “clean” energy is an oxymoron.
7. Delete, except for encouraging advanced nuclear.
8. Keep.
9. Delete.
10. Maybe keep.
11. Ditto.
12. Delete, expensive.
13. Delete.
14. Protecting the intellectual property of American innovators.

There, fixed – a realistic energy plan. 🙂

It doesn't add up...
Reply to  Don
April 17, 2019 12:59 pm

You only need to spend on beefing up the grid if you have more unreliable sources of power connecting to it, so that they can a) deliver power to areas of demand, and b) so that more distant dispatchable power can be used to cover renewables shortages, c) so you can dump renewables surpluses somewhere else, and d) so you can deal with the grid stabilisation required at higher renewables penetration (which is where batteries come in to some extent) – otherwise, it is largely a case of keeping it maintained with replacement investment, unless there is growing demand. Offshore wind is expensive.

Promoting building energy efficiency upgrades gave us the Grenfell Tower fire, where green with appalling economics trumped safe.

Reply to  It doesn't add up...
April 17, 2019 7:23 pm

Population growth pretty much requires that the grid be “beefed up” to handle the additional demand, even if unreliables have no place on it… unless you assume that improved efficiency, both in delivering power and using it, will compensate for such growth.

Improving energy efficiency is generally a good thing, as long as it’s not too expensive to implement… if nothing else, it’ll lower the monthly impact on my bank account, which is always a good thing. 🙂

John Endicott
Reply to  Don
April 18, 2019 8:48 am

Population growth pretty much requires that the grid be “beefed up” to handle the additional demand

except for immigration (legal and otherwise) boosting the numbers, many parts of the US are actually declining in population

Hocus Locus
Reply to  David Middleton
April 17, 2019 3:40 pm

especially small modular reactors

NATURAL GAS: Cat people
NUCLEAR: Dog people

GOP NATURAL GAS CRYPTO-ADVOCATES: “You all need to trade in your dogs for Teacup Terriers because they have a smaller carbon footprint. And because our cats can eat them.”

Reply to  David Middleton
April 17, 2019 10:28 pm

Some of the items on that list are fine (“nuclear energy, especially small modular reactors,” “plastics-to-fuel,” “energy development on federal lands”).

Some of the items on that list are wasteful and useless (“tax incentives for energy efficiency upgrades, including HVAC upgrades,” “challenge grants for universities to develop actionable plans for increasing resiliency and building adaptive capacity in urban and rural areas,” etc.).

Some of the items on that list are idiotic and destructive (“carbon capture storage,” “speedy… adoption of renewable energy including solar, wind,” etc.).

But the worst thing is the underlying false assumption that CO2 emissions are harmful, when the best evidence is that manmade climate change is modest and benign, and CO2 emissions are beneficial, rather than harmful.

Q: What do you get when you mix clean, fresh water with polluted water?
A: Polluted water.

This thing is irredeemably polluted.

Tom Abbott
April 17, 2019 11:02 am

If Republicans want to get involved in lowering CO2 emissions, they should confine themselves to promoting nuclear energy.

Their New Green Deal Lite should be: Whenever an ageing coal of natural gas plant needs replacing, it should be replaced by a modern nuclear reactor.

Their New Green Deal Lite should also promote advanced nuclear power designs for the future.

They should stay completely away from promotig windmills or industrial solar. Don’t touch it!

This way the Republicans have a workable plan they can present to the world that doesn’t require bird killers and the ruining of the beauty of the landscape.

Even I could get behind that plan. The Green New Deal Lite Republicans better wise up.

April 17, 2019 11:10 am

A good comparison to the Rhino Republicans is what happened to Alberta the last 12 years or so. The Alberta Conservatives had a few incompetent Premier’s such that it led to a split in the Conservative base and elected the socialist NDP 4 years ago. That only ended last night with a resounding vote to bring back the Alberta conservatives that are now mainly united. Alberta Party notwithstanding..grrr, which cost the Conservatives at least a half dozen seats. As soon as you start splitting the vote, then it can be over real quick, which is why the Federal Conservatives may still lose to Trudeau in October.

This is the biggest fear that the Republicans should have, in tearing themselves apart with a minority of Rhino republicans…especially since the Democrats are in the midst of creating a new third party by soon having to purge their radical socialist leftists. If the Democrats get their act together, while the Republicans divide themselves trying to be left of centre Republicans hoping to syphon off right of centre Democrats, then this is how they lose the Presidency.

Larry Barden
April 17, 2019 11:31 am

Conservatives buy life insurance and plan carefully for potential future problems. We hope for the best but, if we have a choice, we don’t expect angels to rescue us when/if problems arise.

For a conservative/libertarian revenue-neutral bipartisan plan to reduce fossil fuel CO2 emissions with personal market choices by all American citizens, take a close look at H.R 763, which is currently making its way through a labyrinth of House committees.

The lower 70% of income brackets would receive more money in monthly dividend checks than they would pay in higher costs for goods and services, i.e., their carbon dividend minus carbon tax would be positive .

The top 30% of income brackets would receive exactly the same amount in monthly dividend checks as the lower 70%, but because on average they are responsible for more fossil fuel fuel emissions their monthly dividend checks would be less than the tax they pay for the increased cost of goods and services.

Before you say you have a bridge to sell me, read the bill at:

Sponsored and introduced by Rep. Ted Deutch [D-FL-22] on 01/24/2019
Cosponsored by Rep. Francis Rooney [R-FL-19] on 01/24/2019

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Larry Barden
April 17, 2019 11:48 am

The Carbon tax will cause prices to rise across the board.

So who will repay the taxpayers for all the extra expenses they incur because every price they pay for anything has increased because of the Carbon tax? I don’t think those extra expenses are covered in the Carbon tax bill. The poor ole consumers will just have to pay the higher prices.

The Carbon Tax is Dead on Arrival. No genuine conservative would support such a thing.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 17, 2019 12:09 pm

Yep… and the “carbon dividend” would be spent before it could be refunded to taxpayers.

Reply to  Larry Barden
April 17, 2019 2:07 pm

And WHY should ANY Americans be forced by this democrat-socialist bill to pay ANY higher prices for goods and services and energy than today?

Ah – So the lower 70% get more money (er, get subsidized money from the minority to pay the majority)?
So the lower 70% are PAID by the minority by an unneeded democrat program to vote for the democrats to continue their subsidy?

Reply to  Larry Barden
April 17, 2019 8:53 pm

Currently there is no scientific justification for any proposal for curbing carbon dioxide emissions as the climate models make no predictions.

Kevin R.
April 17, 2019 12:33 pm

The thing is it isn’t governance of a free country it is statist rule over society. There is no safety or future in that.

Adrian Mann
April 17, 2019 1:11 pm

Political suicide for Republicans? What’s not to like? So long as they take One-Term_Trump with them.

Reply to  Adrian Mann
April 17, 2019 3:39 pm

Same goes for the other choice on the menu too.

April 17, 2019 3:36 pm

Tis impossible to open the eyes of the blind, the ears of the deaf and those with broken minds led by ye whom have chosen the path of arrogant self service, deceit and political expedience.


Gunga Din
April 17, 2019 3:55 pm

a small number of congressional Republicans are vigorously pushing a Green New Deal-Lite.

That is why people who haven’t voted in years came out of the woodwork to vote for Trump. He wasn’t an “Obama-lite” like Romney or the other past Republicans that lost. (A few, like Bush, even won.)
He campaigned on appealed to those in the woodwork.
No more PC cr*p. No more suppression of none PC freedoms. No more support of bogus science. NO MORE JUDGES WHO SEEM TO HAVE NEVER READ THE CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS who may not have ever heard of the Declaration of Independence.
(Sorry for the shout.)
There are big RINOS and little rinos. Weed them all out for the sake of all of us.

April 17, 2019 3:56 pm

I Have been a climate skeptic since my first guest post here 2011 (when and why ‘woke’), and a political independent since corever.
But have become a Trumplican. Amazing how the two seem to overlap more and more.

April 17, 2019 4:16 pm

We already had a “Manhattan Project” for green energy. It was called the Manhattan Project, and it gave us our greenest and statistically safest source of energy. It probably wouldn’t hurt to get a few examples of next generation nukes, such as Bill Gates traveling wave reactor up and running.

Reply to  Michael Dombroski (aka Canman)
April 17, 2019 8:59 pm

In my policy research I have found nuclear power to be less safe than we have been led to believe.

April 18, 2019 2:35 am

RINOs are why the GOP lost the House in 2018 elections.

When the GOP had the chance to fix the open-border crisis, repeal Obamacare, and end the wasteful alt-en/bio- fuel federal subsidies, they folded like a cheap suit.

Until these idiotic RINOs are drummed out of the party, the GOP will continue drift Left.

Reply to  SAMURAI
April 18, 2019 3:29 am

Drum them out and the Democrats will win by shear numbers, as it is a two party system and they have no where else to go.

John Endicott
Reply to  Jim
April 18, 2019 5:32 am

Have you looked at the Democrat party lately, they have no more use for the RINOs than Republicans do. Heck they’re threatening to primary their own centrists. Anyone who isn’t far left isn’t welcome in the Donkey party.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  SAMURAI
April 18, 2019 6:03 am

“RINOs are why the GOP lost the House in 2018 elections.”

Yes, and it didn’t help that 40+ Republican incumbents decided not to run for office again. One has to wonder if all the controversy surrounding Trump during that time didn’t influence these decisions. If so, the Democrats were successful with their attacks on Trump. They managed to swing the House to themselves by telling lies about Trump. I think it’s going to swing back in 2020 because there is a lot of disgust out there with the way the Democrats have been behaving. I’ve had several Democrats tell me they were so disgusted with the Democrats that they were changing their political registration because they no longer wanted to be associated with Democrats.

Now it’s time for Trump to attack back. He’s exonerated and the Obama administration is guilty as hell. Trump will expose the truth of these matters and it’s not going to look good for a lot of Obama administration officials. I can hardly wait!

April 18, 2019 3:27 am

Republicans seem very experienced and polished at “Political Suicide”.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Jim
April 18, 2019 6:07 am

Progressive Republicans want to be loved by the Leftwing News Media. So they cow-tow to them and to their political ideas.

We see the reason progressive Republicans pander to the Leftwing. Because if they didn’t, they would get the same treatment Trump gets from the Leftwing News Media and noone wants that. So, out of fear of being attacked, progressive Republicans hold their fire and go along to get along. It’s kind of pathetic really.

April 18, 2019 7:02 am

“Signature political issue of the day?” Where? As in what planet?

Every poll the world over and more particularly in the US shows “climate” at or near the very bottom of people’s “political” concerns. The number one concern presently is the immigration mess, which the Left as allowing to run riot and the Right could shut down but won’t. Which tells me there’s a lot of gaslighting going on, and both sides are beholden to industries who want the influx of cheap help.

Go look on any news-aggregator board and view the numbers of comments for “climate” stories vs. practically anything else and you’ll see the polls are correct. Most people never even think about this, and sure as HELL aren’t open to giving up their cars, vacations, and heating their homes. Trust me!

April 18, 2019 9:13 am

Here’s a draft copy of the so called “Green Real Deal”:

Notice the same underlying false foundation regarding “greenhouse gases” and renewable energy as Cortez’s Green Dumb Deal.

The Green Real Deal is based on a foundation that is just as dumb as its amped up Green New Deal. It does nothing to advance understanding or action with respect to reality.

Kevin R.
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
April 18, 2019 9:23 am

Yes, exactly. Anything based on the same premise keeps the premise alive. It gives it life and keeps it going to be built on further.

Snarling Dolphin
April 18, 2019 12:45 pm

These Republicans are on par with AOC. Just smaller slices of the stupid pie. No use for ‘em.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights