General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSeems the "Green New Deal" isn't such a new idea, nor revolutionary.
This is an article originally from the Huffington Post (posted on Grist) The "Green New Deal" has been around since at least 2007, maybe earlier. This is a good read.
https://grist.org/article/whats-the-green-new-deal-the-surprising-origins-behind-a-progressive-rallying-cry/
Whats the Green New Deal? The surprising origins behind a progressive rallying cry.
The man who popularized the phrase that left-leaning Democrats now use to describe a vision for a radical government spending plan to combat climate change is a self-described centrist free-market guy with a New York Times column.
It was Thomas Friedman who in 2007 started calling for a Green New Deal to end fossil fuel subsidies, tax carbon dioxide emissions, and create lasting incentives for wind and solar energy. At the dawn of the global financial crisis, the New Deal concept that Franklin D. Roosevelt coined 76 years earlier to describe the labor reforms and historic spending on infrastructure and armaments that pulled the United States out of the Great Depression proved attractive.
Friedmans ideas made it into the mainstream the following year when presidential candidate Barack Obama added a Green New Deal to his platform. In 2009, the United Nations drafted a report calling for a Global Green New Deal to focus government stimulus on renewable energy projects. A month later, Democrats landmark cap-and-trade bill meant to set up a market where companies could buy and sell pollution permits and take a conservative first step toward limiting carbon dioxide emissions passed in the House with the promise of spurring $150 billion in clean energy investments and creating 1.7 million good-paying jobs.
(more....)
nini
(16,672 posts)AT least to anyone who pays attention over time.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)brush
(53,778 posts)from a small state have been.
Obama, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter with his solar cells on the WH roof (that Reagan had torn out when he took his stolen office), Dems have been at the fore of green ideas always.
More study needed by those who think no one had thought of this before.
DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)So debating the newness is rather petty and bizarre. Creating a hybrid concept (green + new deal) is relatively new (since Friedmans article), but thats really a non-issue too.
We have a planet to save and the phrase is a good one and its finally getting some traction in the press. Friends... eyes on the prize. Save our holy planet.
PhrankT
(113 posts)Friedmans ideas made it into the mainstream the following year when presidential candidate Barack Obama added a Green New Deal to his platform.
In 2009, the United Nations drafted a report calling for a Global Green New Deal to focus government stimulus on renewable energy projects.
A month later, Democrats landmark cap-and-trade bill meant to set up a market where companies could buy and sell pollution permits and take a conservative first step toward limiting carbon dioxide emissions passed in the House with the promise of spurring $150 billion in clean energy investments and creating 1.7 million good-paying jobs.
But, by 2010, austerity politics hit.
The cap-and-trade bill, known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act, died in the Senate.
In Britain, the Labor Party, acting on a proposal that a team of economists calling themselves the Green New Deal Group drafted, established a government-run green investment bank to bolster renewable energy only for the conservative Tories to sweep into office months later and begin the process of privatizing the nascent institution.
Balanced budgets and deficit hysteria became the dogma of governments across the developed world.
Talk of a Green New Deal withered on the vine.
Great Post
It is really interesting to read the history of the Green New Deal, the attempts by Democrats in the US as well as the Labor Party in UK to bring about such positive green deals, only to be stopped, predictably, by the conservative Torries in UK and the Republicans in the US Senate.
betsuni
(25,531 posts)Cha
(297,240 posts)Deal.
George II
(67,782 posts)Cha
(297,240 posts)DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)People have had good ideas and bad ideas for thousands of years. Important ideas, and social movements that bring those ideas to fruition, take time to snowball.
GIVEN that most people are ignoring global warming to focus almost entirely on The Trump Show, shoukdnt we be relieved that this phrase is getting some traction?
Many have complained over the years that the Republicans are fiends at meme generation especially with talk radio to fan the flames. Now we have a good solid phrase (in 3 syllables!) to address two imoortant issues. Its combustive. Help develop it I say. Why whine about who said what when?
Eyes on the prize. Green New Deal is going on my bumper because Various committees and green-oriented white papers and so and so said whatever first just has no carrying power.
Cha
(297,240 posts)the History of the New Green Deal.
DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)mcar
(42,333 posts)once upon a time, too. Funny how some think Democrats speaking up about it is a new thing.
George II
(67,782 posts)...he predicted that within twenty years we'd have serious energy problems (those problems would have manifested themselves more than 20 years ago!)
Another thing about Carter and his energy/petroleum policies - he is the one who established the underground oil reserves, and he was castigated by republicans, Reagan in particular, for that "idiotic" idea. But now every time someone proposes that we use those reserves the REPUBLICANS balk and claim "they're too important and strategic"!!
Funny how others, some Democrats included, latch onto "bad ideas" once they're shown to be GOOD ideas!
mcar
(42,333 posts)Younger then, all of us!
FSogol
(45,486 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)progressoid
(49,990 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Keep to the subject, please.
progressoid
(49,990 posts)I just was recalling a memory that he was pushing clean coal as a candidate and new President. Sorry if I misunderstood your Obama reference.
DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)Does that mean that the back to Earth movements of the late 1960s had no reason to exist? Since Thoreau or St. Francis or any intelligent, ecologically brilliant sage said such and such, do we wave the finger at those who followed?
I really dont get a lot of the shop talk on this forum. It seems so narrow-minded sometimes. Do think Rachel Carson (Silent Spring) would want us to put the breaks on the griwing popularity of the Green New Deal?
Save the planet. Theres no time to be petty.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,328 posts)brush
(53,778 posts)in Obama's proposals?
Do you have anything of substance to add?
George II
(67,782 posts)progressoid
(49,990 posts)Pot shots at AOC, the Green New Deal and others in the progressive wing are OK. Pot shots at Obama, NOT OK.
Got it.
Autumn
(45,091 posts)Making good on campaign promises, the president is throwing the full weight of his administration behind a moonshot effort to make coal the "clean" energy technology of choice and open a federal pathway to a profitable future for one of the nation's most polluting industries.
Three factors have cemented Obama's support for carbon capture and sequestration technology: political necessity, economic opportunity and the backing of some of the most powerful mainstream environmental organizations operating inside the Beltway.
With climate legislation stuck in the Senate and perhaps in limbo until after the next presidential election, green groups are evaluating their next moves, trapped by concessions they negotiated with the coal industry, but betrayed by the politics, which has now left them without climate protection measures that were supposed to be part of the deal.
progressoid
(49,990 posts)I forgot how Biden got the campaign in trouble in Ohio when he blurted out that "that neither he nor Obama supported clean coal. The McCain campaign tried to make hay from the uninformed indiscretion, and the Obama camp dispatched Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) to reassure voters that the Democratic ticket was "a friend of coal." "
Oops.
Autumn
(45,091 posts)president said, supported or did is an insult.
progressoid
(49,990 posts)Isn't this tread for nitpicking Democrats?
Cha
(297,240 posts)you can come up with regarding President Obama and his Green energy Platform?!
question everything
(47,479 posts)Running against the two larger then life candidates was a bit hard.
FSogol
(45,486 posts)Over actual accomplishments. He's cursed with being competent and prolific. His plans were based in reality, not fantasy.
ismnotwasm
(41,984 posts)One of my pet peeves on how ideas are presented, is when a particular group of people claim credit for the hard work of a lot of other people.
sheshe2
(83,771 posts)thank you.
Merry Christmas to you and yours.
ismnotwasm
(41,984 posts)Im hit and miss everywhereWe are dealing with my dying dog, (cancer) we will have him put down after Christmas, so Im not much in the spirit. My poor baby
WeekiWater
(3,259 posts)What Pelosi has done is a really good move. The coordinated attacks seem really shady.
herding cats
(19,564 posts)We just need to remember we each have a voice and we have a responsibility to use them to debunk false stories.
WeekiWater
(3,259 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Cuthbert Allgood
(4,921 posts)But perhaps that isn't clear to everyone?
herding cats
(19,564 posts)I didn't say she wasn't.
I'm saying the propaganda is bushit. And whatever she might evolve into being is tainted by this bullshit.
KPN
(15,646 posts)Geezuz the dividers here.
And why do you think so many of us, and especially young educated people, have been banging our heads on a wall over this shit: global warming, sustainable/renewable energy, etc., forever.
Irritating!
George II
(67,782 posts)irresistable
(989 posts)melman
(7,681 posts)Mariana
(14,857 posts)KPN
(15,646 posts)with the idea recently? Hmmm ....
Mariana
(14,857 posts)Autumn
(45,091 posts)This the premise of this thread is bizarre. If there even is one beyond the obvious intent to bash AOC.
Gotta squash the upstarts who "haven't paid their dues", until they learn to "go along to get along", "pay appropriate respect to their elders", and accept "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". All principles that young people began casting aside 15-20 years ago and continue to do so. Heck, in many ways as far back as the 60s in my recollection.
Some folks forget their past, and have become enamored with either what worked for them or their own position within the power construct; in other words, themselves. I think it, so it must be right!
melman
(7,681 posts)I mean what's the point? It's not a new idea! And? So let's not do anything? It doesn't make any sense at all.
bigtree
(85,996 posts)https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211580214
The original poster is focused in this thread on a political slam of AOC, using this important issue as a cudgel. Cynicism over climate change efforts just bleeds out of this unfortunate thread.
KPN
(15,646 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)bigtree
(85,996 posts)Cuthbert Allgood
(4,921 posts)Well, actually, no, but if it makes you feel clever to respond with "she isn't mentioned in the OP" then have at it.
irresistable
(989 posts)I'm interested in implementing the idea.
yardwork
(61,620 posts)irresistable
(989 posts)KPN
(15,646 posts)yardwork
(61,620 posts)You've made a personal accusation against me. Either provide a link with evidence supporting your accusation or have the courtesy to apologize and self-delete.
KPN
(15,646 posts)KPN
(15,646 posts)How about you apologize for making assumptions and, as a result, this exchange personal? Jeepers.
yardwork
(61,620 posts)Why did you respond to my post with that accusation?
Put up or shut up.
KPN
(15,646 posts)Again, no. My comment was in reference to the OP.
How about answer my question? If Hillary's platform included a "green new deal" in effect, why does this OP/thread essentially criticize AOC and other young legislators/activists for promoting the same?
yardwork
(61,620 posts)Why are you asking me questions about the OP?
KPN
(15,646 posts)Why did you post that it was in Hillary's platform?
From this exchange, I can only assume that you took my question personally -- even though it wasn't intended to be -- because it fit.
yardwork
(61,620 posts)I didn't respond to you until you accused me of putting down young people. Your posts in this thread are bizarre.
KPN
(15,646 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)So far it's been used as a cudgel to beat up on Pelosi. I imagine it would do good service in that department against O'Rourke, Jefffries and assorted other Dem rivals. Beyond that its goals were vague. So other than a catchy meme I don't see what there was of value in it.
KPN
(15,646 posts)How is its use beating up on Pelosi? (BTW, huge supporter of Pelosi here -- always have been). I don't buy it. How is promoting a proposal to accomplish good ends a negative. I don't see it. To me, there's a boat load of sour grapes formed out of a "pay your dues" mentality going on here.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)In non-handmade-letters on a not-handmade sign:
This is when Pelosi was facing what was then a stiff challenge to her leadership. To my eye this has the air of manufactured drama. Then there was the business with Jeffries, and before that, the business with Crowley. All that antagonism to achieve what exactly? "Green jobs for all?" Is that like Medicare for All? If so it doesn't exist except as a slogan and that's not a positive proposal.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)A vague wish list ranging far beyond climate that they never intended to result in a working committee. Universal basic income alone deserves its own special committee committed to that, but when we do set one up they'll attack that because it's not theirs. A green new deal national bank to control the federal reserve?
God!!! I OD'd on radical saboteurs in the late 1960s.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)For years we heard a steady stream of insinuations, declamations, accusations and defamations about how corrupt and compromised the Obama administration was for letting Wall Street banksters go free while creating legislation like the TARP for feathering their bankrolls at our expense. But when we finally got to hear that list of Wall Street criminals named, who was on it?
The Waltons of Arkansas and Jeff Bezos of Amazon.
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)bigtree
(85,996 posts)Gothmog
(145,264 posts)I am glad the President Obama proposed these programs
bigtree
(85,996 posts)...the bent of this thread is that someone was taking credit for something already accomplished.
There was no GND enacted into law. That's why this very public push by AOC and others is important. We need the renewed energy and focus on this legislation to carry it forward.
This thread, and I'm not going to be duped by it, is just a swipe at AOC for having the audacity to present it anew. It's a cynical look back at things which were certainly proposed and voted on, but never made it into law.
Instead of all of the backslapping for the past, and the political attempt to marginalize this freshman legislator we need to get behind these folks who are pushing for significant, meaningful reform RIGHT NOW.
But have fun cheerleading the last president, as if that's even remotely something that's going to move the debate forward.
betsuni
(25,531 posts)Republican opposition to cap and trade? "In order to pass comprehensive legislation, you have to have 60 votes. To get 60 votes, you've got to have Republicans. As of today, we don't have any Republicans." John Kerry.
If Democrats can't get enough votes to pass legislation, please don't blame Cortez and other Democrats. Blame Republicans.
bigtree
(85,996 posts)...that's what happens when you jump in the middle of others conversations.
The point is directed to the author of this unfortunate thread for trying to shame AOC. Absolutely correct that there are going to be forces out of our control which dictate the politics of climate change legislation. That should make it clear why this freshman legislator is working hard to make it a priority in THIS Congress.
NOTHING I wrote "blames Democrats," but if you want to be truthful you need to acknowledge the obstacles in our own party to comprehensive reform; for anything resembling an environmental "Marshall Plan."
betsuni
(25,531 posts)bigtree
(85,996 posts)...carry on.
...now you'll really be talking to yourself when you direct posts at me.
Cha
(297,240 posts)lol!
betsuni
(25,531 posts)It's a Festivus miracle!
Cha
(297,240 posts)bust him.
KPN
(15,646 posts)other young legislators and activists?
Gothmog
(145,264 posts)Response to Gothmog (Reply #71)
bigtree This message was self-deleted by its author.
As if. lol
KPN
(15,646 posts)anyone, anywhere.
Sour grapes.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)melman
(7,681 posts)Let's see if the OP answers it. I won't hold my breath.
George II
(67,782 posts)Quixote1818
(28,936 posts)https://www.sciencehistory.org/distillations/magazine/richard-nixon-and-the-rise-of-american-environmentalism
And if you want to go way, way, way back Teddy Roosevelt was supporting the Environment pretty hardcore. Oh! And Thomas Jefferson!
How far should we go back to make her look bad?
R B Garr
(16,954 posts)of making people look bad, he should be acknowledged as a leading Democrat on this issue from decades ago by both Bernie and AOC.
Thanks to Bill Clinton and Al Gore for running on climate change even when it wasnt cool and trendy.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)and the same group of politicians who take money from these billionaires, appear uninterested in doing anything substantive.
Quixote1818
(28,936 posts)Really don't get the point of this thread.
Cha
(297,240 posts)helped a lot of people in spite of the repubs and those who thought it wasn't perfect.
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)Hopefully they fight for whats right regardless of whose idea it was.
George II
(67,782 posts)R B Garr
(16,954 posts)for keeping it real.
Bucky
(54,013 posts)Ideas have to kick around for a while before they're implemented.
The tragedy is that we needed a green New Deal about 20 years ago. Now that climate change is killing jobs and killing people, we're talkin about 13th-hour solutions