Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(59,587 posts)
Sun Apr 28, 2019, 10:40 AM Apr 2019

So CUTE!! The US Chamber Of Commerce Has A New Climate Initiative!!

The US Chamber of Commerce, through its Global Energy Institute (GEI), recently announced the launch of a major new climate initiative called the American Energy: Cleaner, Stronger campaign. It’s admitted purpose is to “counter the Green New Deal (GND) with an energy innovation agenda…to persuade the public and Congress that technology is better than regulation in addressing climate change.” (emphasis added).

In taking a swipe at the GND, the Chamber has handed its progressive Democratic authors and supporters a key victory—certainly something it had not intended to do. Whatever the Green New Deal is or isn’t, the idea of it has accomplished what was thought Impossible just months ago–the admission by traditionally conservative deniers that climate change is real and needs to be acted upon now. The Chamber’s announcement boldly states inaction is not an option. The actions to be taken, however, remain matters of dogmatic ideological debate.

On its face, the Chamber’s call to action is a far cry from its 2017 policy priorities. Today climate change is on the minds of voters because it is on the lips of every Democrat in Congress, as well as those vying for the party’s presidential nomination. The Chamber’s newly announced campaign is an effort to remain relevant. Not every Democrat has embraced the GND. All, however, have acknowledged that climate policy is one of the Party’s top three priorities going into the 2020 elections.

The Chamber’s opinion poll (discussed below) confirms what voter surveys by Gallup and others have recently shown. Voters are putting a very high priority on the need to combat, mitigate, and adapt to the harsh consequences of Earth’s warming. For the Chamber to do otherwise guarantees its being marginalized—if not discredited—in the current 2019-2020 election cycle. There is a legitimate question to be asked of the Chamber and others professing a sudden Saul-like conversion from denier and opposer to believer and vouchsafed advocate: Is the conversion from climate denier to defender real or simply an attempt to muddle the debate from inside rather than outside the global climate defense community?

EDIT

https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-04-24/the-us-chamber-of-commerces-new-take-on-climate-change/

Oh, and here are their 2017 "policy priorities" on climate, in case you were wondering:

Climate Change

Continue to strongly support efforts to improve energy efficiency and develop clean energy alternatives, which will help the nation further reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Continue to urge that any comprehensive legislative solution must not harm the economy, recognize that the problem is international in scope, and aggressively promote new technologies and efficiency. Protecting our economy and protecting the environment for future generations are mutually achievable goals.

Support vigorous efforts to address our environmental challenges, including climate change, by focusing on what has proven to work—energy efficiency and technologies. Support alternatives and renewables along with traditional energy.Work to ensure that a comprehensive international treaty on climate change has the widest possible participation, is credible, implemented fairly, and receives Senate consideration and ratification as required by the U.S. Constitution.

Oppose EPA efforts to regulate greenhouse gases under the existing Clean Air Act, including the endangerment finding.

Champion efforts by industry to develop energy efficient and low emissions technologies and export them to the developing world, where the bulk of new greenhouse gas emissions are expected to occur.

Ensure that large emerging economies share responsibility for addressing climate change

https://web.archive.org/web/20170913230147/https:/www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/2017_policy_priorities_-_2.8.17.pdf

IOW, the same old meaningless wooba-gooba.

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So CUTE!! The US Chamber Of Commerce Has A New Climate Initiative!! (Original Post) hatrack Apr 2019 OP
"technology is better than regulation in addressing climate change" gtar100 Apr 2019 #1

gtar100

(4,192 posts)
1. "technology is better than regulation in addressing climate change"
Sun Apr 28, 2019, 05:49 PM
Apr 2019

Sounds like on of those pithy assertions that pretends to say something when it doesn't really make any sense because the words are too generic. But I'll play along for a moment. "Technology" in this context could mean what? Some sort of hardware/software solution? Any engineered solution will need to regulate inputs and outputs to have any kind control over desired outcomes. Someone is going to have to decide on the rules the systems must follow. The requirement for regulations is an essential ingredient for any working system. What I think these people want is to be the ones who control the decisions - the regulations - because they are afraid of government regulating in the interests of people and not on behalf of companies wanting to artificially protect their markets.

Our so-called free market capitalism is actually built on a foundation of socialized policies that prop up businesses on the backs of taxpayers in the working class. But instead of benefitting large groups of people, the subsidies and tax breaks go to the wealthy few. Their whining about "government regulations" is just an attempt to hide their real intentions.

Edit to add: Not just subsidies and tax breaks, but they also want to control the basic rules of the game that any normal government sets up for operating businesses within a country. And they, of course, skew them in the direction of protection, not some ideal market purity test of "no government regulation". Disingenuous at best.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»So CUTE!! The US Chamber ...