Source: When Ed Markey Tweets “No Climate, No Deal,” What Does He Mean? | The New Republic
Senator Ed Markey and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speak during a press conference to reintroduce the Green New Deal in front of the U.S. Capitol in April 2021.
“No climate, no deal” is the new catchphrase among climate groups and lawmakers in the House and Senate. Not just stalwart Green New Dealers like Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey but also more centrist types like Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado and New Mexico Senator Martin Heinrich have echoed the sentiment with tweets and press statements in the past few days. So far, nine senators and 12 House members have said they won’t vote for any version of the White House’s infrastructure bill that doesn’t include bold climate action. But what exactly does “bold” mean?
For now, that’s not clear.
Climate-focused Democrats frustrated with the amount of time being spent on bipartisan negotiations have been slow to articulate a concrete counteroffer to the current $1 trillion proposal, only $579 billion of which is new spending, set to be dispersed over eight years. “The next step is to give those demands some teeth,” said Kaniela Ing, climate justice campaign director at People’s Action, referring to the “no climate, no deal” rhetoric. But so far “there have been no hard agreements,” he said, among those unhappy with what’s on the table. Progressive offices and nonprofits are now in the process of trying to align their priorities, which may include $1 trillion of funding for public renewables and $500 billion for clean transportation. The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) has put out several climate priorities for an infrastructure package, including investment in renewables and energy efficiency. Any forthcoming proposal is likely to incorporate pieces from various bills introduced by more left-leaning party members that appear in the CPC’s list, including an environmental justice mapping initiative, a Civilian Conservation Corps, and a clean electricity standard.
Climate advocates are broadly skeptical about bipartisan infrastructure talks. One tactic they do seem to agree on, Sunrise Movement Legislative Director Lauren Maunus told me by phone, is withholding votes as leverage to make sure a budget resolution can pass that creates a path toward a bolder reconciliation package. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is pushing a two-track approach: one smaller and entirely paid-for bipartisan package and a broader reconciliation measure passed along party lines. The White House has reportedly given the Senate gang seven to 10 days to finalize the former. On the latter, Schumer—who has vowed “bold” action on climate—has said he’ll push for clean energy tax credits and electric vehicle rebates to be included in the leadership’s “Unity Budget.”
Others have more aggressively demanded an end to bipartisan talks. “We cannot let Republican calls for bipartisanship deny the American people the climate action they have been demanding,” Markey said in a press conference Tuesday, comparing GOP negotiating tactics to the ones deployed a decade ago to stop his cap-and-trade package: “Dither, delay, deny.” Elizabeth Warren told Politico, “It has to be one bill, not two.” Splitting the difference, Senator Jeff Merkley said he hoped for “two tracks welded together,” which put climate at the center. As of writing, there aren’t enough Democratic votes to get the still-unreleased $1 trillion bipartisan package through.
Leave a Reply