http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bernie+sanders+climate+change

https://berniesanders.com/issues/climate-change/

One Simple Chart Explains The Climate Plans Of Hillary Clinton And Bernie Sanders?

There seem to be a good many.

Based on public comments? Hillary ran on cap and trade in 2007. Did they overlook that public comment?

Where is Bernie's detailed proposal?

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

You might also enjoy this:


Bernie Sanders attacks Clinton’s climate plan: ‘Not enough’

By Daniel Strauss

7/28/15 5:24 PM EDT
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Sen. Bernie Sanders sees a big gaping hole in Hillary Clinton’s newly released climate-change proposals: the Keystone pipeline.

“It is hard for me to understand how one can be concerned about climate change but not vigorously oppose the Keystone pipeline,” Sanders, who is challenging Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, said in a statement released on Tuesday.

The statement came in response to Clinton being asked during a town-hall event in New Hampshire about her thoughts on the pipeline. Clinton demurred when asked.

“This is President Obama’s decision and I’m not going to second-guess him because I was in a position to set this in motion and I do not think that would be the right thing to do,” Clinton said.

That response and Sanders’ attack came a day after the former secretary of state and Democratic frontrunner unveiled her ambitious set of goals for the environment. Clinton proposed a goal of producing a third of the nation’s electricity from renewable energy from 2027 as well as installing 500 million solar panels by 2020.

That wasn’t enough for Sanders, who said her proposals were a good idea but “not enough.”

“We must make significant reductions in carbon emissions and break our dependency on fossil fuels,” Sanders said. “That is why I have helped lead the fight in the Senate against the Keystone pipeline, which would transport some of the dirtiest fossil fuel in the world.”

Maybe she's just sleeping late this morning. I thank you! Good reply!

It shows nothing of a detailed plan. And how "brave" of Bernie to criticize Hillary's plan while not having one of his own. That's some Repub level hypocrisy, ala Obamacare.

Is Bernie Sanders the Best Candidate on Climate Change?
He was recently ranked as the Senate's top leader on global warming.

—By Ben Adler
| Thu May 14, 2015 6:15 AM EDT


John Pemble/Flickr

This article originally appeared in Grist and is republished here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The Democratic presidential primary race got its second major candidate recently, and its first true climate hawk: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, self-described democratic socialist. Sanders has one of the strongest climate change records in the Senate. In fact, according to rankings released by Climate Hawks Vote, a new super PAC, Sanders was the No. 1 climate leader in the Senate for the 113th Congress that ended in January.

How the 2016 contenders will deal with climate change

John Kasich Actually Believes in Climate Change. But He Doesn't Want to Fix It.
Jeb Bush on Climate Change: "I'm a Skeptic"
Marco Rubio Used to Believe in Climate Science
Rick Perry Know 3 Things About Global Warming…
Rand Paul Is No Moderate on Global Warming
Scientists: Ted Cruz's Climate Theories Are a "Load of Claptrap"
Scott Walker Is the Worst Candidate for the Environment
How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World
Jim Webb Is Awful on Climate Change
Martin O'Malley Is a Real Climate Hawk
George Pataki Leads 2016 GOP Crowd…

Climate Hawks Vote measures leadership, not just voting records, tabulating actions like bills introduced, speeches given, and so forth. In the 112th Congress, Sanders ranked third behind Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.). In the last Congress, he edged out Whitehouse by one point.

"Sanders is very much among the top leaders," says R.L. Miller, founder of Climate Hawks Vote. "He has a record of really strong advocacy for solar in particular." Miller notes that distributed solar, which enables everyone with a solar panel to create their own energy instead of relying on a monopolistic utility company, fits especially well with Sanders' democratic socialist philosophy. It's bad for corporations and good for regular folks who get to own the means of production.

Here are some of the highlights from Sanders' climate and clean energy record:

In 2013, along with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Sanders introduced the Climate Protection Act, a fee-and-dividend bill. It would tax carbon and methane emissions and rebate three-fifths of the revenue to citizens, then invest the remainder in energy efficiency, clean energy, and climate resiliency. The bill, of course, went nowhere (even if it had advanced in the Democratic-controlled Senate, it would have been DOA in the Republican-controlled House), but it shows that Sanders supports serious solutions and wants to keep the conversation going.

Also in 2013, Sanders introduced the Residential Energy Savings Act to fund financing programs that would help residents retrofit their homes for energy efficiency. This bill didn't become law either.

In 2012, Sanders introduced the End Polluter Welfare Act, to get rid of special tax deductions and credits for coal, oil, and gas producers. As he wrote in Grist at the time, "It is immoral that some in Congress advocate savage cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security while those same people vote to preserve billions in tax breaks for ExxonMobil, the most profitable corporation in America." The bill didn't pass.

In 2010, Sanders authored a bill to spread distributed solar throughout the country, the very literally named "10 Million Solar Roofs & 10 Million Gallons of Solar Hot Water Act." As Grist's David Roberts explained, it would "provide rebates that cover up to half the cost of new systems, along the lines of incentive programs in California and New Jersey." The bill didn't pass.

In 2007, he cowrote with then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) the Green Jobs Act, which allocated funding for clean energy and energy efficiency research and job training. This did pass, as part of a big 2007 energy bill.

Also in 2007, with Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), he cosponsored the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, to help states and local governments pay for efficiency and clean energy programs. It was also passed as part of the 2007 energy bill, and both the block grant program and the green jobs program got a funding infusion from the 2009 stimulus package.

So we know Sanders is dedicated to climate action and clean energy. Looking forward, though, it's unclear how Sanders will differentiate his climate and energy proposals from Clinton's. Clinton, like President Obama, firmly supports regulating carbon emissions domestically and getting strong international agreements to reduce emissions globally. While it is certainly true that Sanders has made more of an issue of his support for the same, it is not necessarily an issue on which Clinton needs to be pushed leftward. Many climate hawks love the fee-and-dividend approach that Sanders supports, but the truth is that no big climate-pricing bill will pass in the next few years, no matter who's president, because the Republicans will continue to control the House. And Clinton already supports the kind of strong executive action that Obama is taking to curb CO2 emissions from power plants.
"On climate stuff [Sanders has] been the most aggressive voice in the Senate," says Bill McKibben.

One way Sanders could set himself apart as the greenest candidate would be to propose clamping down on domestic fossil fuel extraction, especially on federal lands and waters—something a president could move on without congressional approval. Sanders has not spoken up about the extraction issue in general, but he could call for a moratorium on fossil fuel leasing offshore or on federal land. That would please climate activists, who are already expressing concern that Clinton isn't committed to keeping dirty fuel sources in the ground. "What we really need," says Miller, "is someone to advocate for closing down the Powder River Basin"—an area in Montana and Wyoming that's a huge source of coal mined from federal land—"but no one is really willing to come out and say that, so instead they come out for higher prices on coal leases. Sanders has not."

In an interview with the Washington Post's Greg Sargent, Sanders called for a progressive climate agenda that includes a carbon tax and investments in renewables, energy efficiency, and alternative transportation—but he made no mention of restricting fossil fuel development. Here is what he offered:

A tax on carbon; a massive investment in solar, wind, geothermal; it would be making sure that every home and building in this country is properly winterized; it would be putting substantial money into rail, both passenger and cargo, so we can move towards breaking our dependency on automobiles. And it would be leading other countries around the world.

Bill McKibben, who founded 350.org and has led the fight to stop the Keystone XL pipeline, says he is confident Sanders understands the need to keep fossil fuels in the ground. Sanders has opposed Keystone, while Clinton has avoided taking a position on it. "He's been the most consistent and proactive voice in the entire Keystone fight," writes McKibben in an email. "Everything that's been needed—from speeches on the floor to legislation to demands that the State Department change its absurd review process—he and his staff have done immediately and with a high degree of professionalism…On climate stuff he's been the most aggressive voice in the Senate, rivaled only by Sheldon Whitehouse. He understands it for the deep, simple problem it is: that we can't keep burning this stuff." (Full disclosure: McKibben is a member of Grist's board of directors.)

One area where Sanders indisputably differs from Clinton is trade. Clinton, like her husband and Obama, has been an ardent supporter of free trade agreements. Some environmentalists worry that these agreements—like NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) that is currently under consideration—give polluting companies too much power to undermine environmental regulations in signatory nations. As secretary of state, Clinton supported the TPP, although as a candidate her campaign advisors say she hasn't made up her mind on it. Sanders is one of the most skeptical members of the Senate on trade agreements and he is currently helping to lead the charge against the TPP.

To describe Sanders' challenge against Clinton as uphill would be too generous. It's more like climbing Mt. Everest—without oxygen or a guide. But by bringing attention to some of these issues, he may raise awareness and draw Clinton out. Sanders' office declined to comment for this story, citing an overwhelming number of interview requests following announcement of his candidacy. That speaks to the megaphone a presidential campaign can grant a candidate, especially in a nearly empty field. Sanders is sure to use it for worthy causes. Will keeping fossil fuels in the ground be one of them?

another one term Senator who has said this week she won't share her stand on Keystone until she absolutely has to. Aren't you even curious as to how she stands on fracking or Keystone? Funny how happy some might be with a platitude ridden plan almost free of detail but no interest at all in her specific policies she won't shed light on and others I think you find against your interests - like the war in Afghanistan, privatization of prisons, dark PAC money, three strikes and mandatory sentencing, drilling on public land, no policy to find a non petroleum based energy.........

My hope is at least Bernie might make her evolve on some of these issue you and I most likely agree on that Hillary is against or silent on.

the next talking point. As someone who is concerned about the environment and am concerned with the transportation of the tar sand crude via rail and we have had some incidences. These pipeline are running by cities and peoples' homes and has been an environment problem.

"By contrast, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) — her main contender for the Democratic nomination — hasn’t formally released a climate policy plan yet. "

The main thing that Bernie wants us to do is become morally responsible and socially aware of the ramifications of continuing like we are burning fossil fuels.

If the country can just do that one socially correct thing, we will fix this problem.

That means no to Keystone. That means no welfare for big oil. That means making polluters pay - which means Wall Street takes responsibility for its ravenous raping of the atmosphere for its profits.

I figure Janey you will just ignore this and blather some more blather, but there it is: Moral and social responsibility is what Bernie wants from our country.

Consistency is authenticity. Progressive values, as detailed by Lakoff ("Don't hink Of An Elephant&quot predict the positions Bernie has taken and will continue to take. He may call himself an independent but his values are progressive values, the same values, that are moving democrats in a progressive direction. He is not a change but a recognition of our struggle against those who say compromise on support for the people and you cannot get elected if you actually tell the people the truth, just stay centered as better than radical republicans. Yep, the day of combining progressive action to satisfy justified populism has arrived. The days of whining why oh why do poor whites vote against themselves and feeling superior is over. We recognize the culprits behind the racism, sexism, and bravado nationalism are doing it for the greedy clas as they try to make us more and more the needy class. We will by removing their power remove their blight on our society. As veterans say never again shall we leave our brothers behind, we must never leave our brothers or our sisters behind regardless of race, sexual orientation, or national origin. We know the economc war must be fought and if we stand together, we will prevail. If we don't civilization, the environment, and mankind itself will be sacrificed on the altar of the greedy class. We are not the middle class, we are the needy class being made evermore needy by the greedy class. We are not blind and we are organizing with this vision.

I wonder why no other Dem candidate has thought of that

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/05/bernie-sanders-greenest-presidential-candidate
Excerpt:

The Democratic presidential primary race got its second major candidate recently, and its first true climate hawk: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, self-described democratic socialist. Sanders has one of the strongest climate change records in the Senate. In fact, according to rankings released by Climate Hawks Vote, a new super PAC, Sanders was the No. 1 climate leader in the Senate for the 113th Congress that ended in January.

How the 2016 contenders will deal with climate change

Climate Hawks Vote measures leadership, not just voting records, tabulating actions like bills introduced, speeches given, and so forth. In the 112th Congress, Sanders ranked third behind Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.). In the last Congress, he edged out Whitehouse by one point.

"Sanders is very much among the top leaders," says R.L. Miller, founder of Climate Hawks Vote. "He has a record of really strong advocacy for solar in particular." Miller notes that distributed solar, which enables everyone with a solar panel to create their own energy instead of relying on a monopolistic utility company, fits especially well with Sanders' democratic socialist philosophy. It's bad for corporations and good for regular folks who get to own the means of production.

Here are some of the highlights from Sanders' climate and clean energy record:

In 2013, along with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Sanders introduced the Climate Protection Act, a fee-and-dividend bill. It would tax carbon and methane emissions and rebate three-fifths of the revenue to citizens, then invest the remainder in energy efficiency, clean energy, and climate resiliency. The bill, of course, went nowhere (even if it had advanced in the Democratic-controlled Senate, it would have been DOA in the Republican-controlled House), but it shows that Sanders supports serious solutions and wants to keep the conversation going.

Also in 2013, Sanders introduced the Residential Energy Savings Act to fund financing programs that would help residents retrofit their homes for energy efficiency. This bill didn't become law either.

In 2012, Sanders introduced the End Polluter Welfare Act, to get rid of special tax deductions and credits for coal, oil, and gas producers. As he wrote in Grist at the time, "It is immoral that some in Congress advocate savage cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security while those same people vote to preserve billions in tax breaks for ExxonMobil, the most profitable corporation in America." The bill didn't pass.

In 2010, Sanders authored a bill to spread distributed solar throughout the country, the very literally named "10 Million Solar Roofs & 10 Million Gallons of Solar Hot Water Act." As Grist's David Roberts explained, it would "provide rebates that cover up to half the cost of new systems, along the lines of incentive programs in California and New Jersey." The bill didn't pass.

In 2007, he cowrote with then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) the Green Jobs Act, which allocated funding for clean energy and energy efficiency research and job training. This did pass, as part of a big 2007 energy bill.

Also in 2007, with Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), he cosponsored the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, to help states and local governments pay for efficiency and clean energy programs. It was also passed as part of the 2007 energy bill, and both the block grant program and the green jobs program got a funding infusion from the 2009 stimulus package.

Hillary has a long list of great environmental votes too. Where's the detailed plan for his presidency?

you get a pretty good idea of what they would promote and/or support as president

Without a detailed plan they are not leading on an issue. Even worse, to not have a detailed plan, yet, criticize others for their's. Reminds me of repubs and Obamacare.

Whatever. Was just looking for a detailed plan.

No alternate proposals? Just like a Republican and Obamacare?.....Got any other little innuendos in your bag o' tricks?

I love people who ask snarky rhetorical questions and then ignore the answers.

By the way, can you tell me Hillary's position on Keystone (a significant climate issue) is?

From the link above: "By contrast, Bernie hasn't released a climate change proposal yet".

The data-loving Maryland gov could have the greenest credentials of any '16 contender.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/12/martin-omalley-longshot-presidential-candidate-and-real-climate-hawk

Martin O'Malley: Zero out fossil fuels by 2050.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/06/18/pope-francis-encyclical-clean-energy-technology-campaign-column/28859409/

and an apparent attempt to imply that he has no specific plan

"By contrast, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) — her main contender for the Democratic nomination — hasn’t formally released a climate policy plan yet. "

There is no reason to imply that he has no specific plan. He doesn't.

Not "a" real debate, but a prolonged discussion of all the candidates policies.
I don't want to hear about how it can't be done immediately, tomorrow, as an excuse for not advocating for it today, and planning for it today. I don't want to hear about how "Repug" opposition is so strong that we should capitulate, then join in a piecemeal destruction of the very idea by joining in a "bipartisan" effort with Republicans who don't understand the concept and want to tear down even what we have.

I want a true debate within the Democratic party to be happening NOW.

and it sure as hell should occur HERE at DU!

to help get pro-environment legislation passed. With Hillary out of the way, surely he could have gotten at least one of those bills passed since she left.

Here's the summary of a bill he introduced in 2013

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s332/summary
The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.
2/14/2013--Introduced.
Climate Protection Act of 2013 - Amends the Clean Air Act to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to impose: (1) a carbon pollution fee on any manufacturer, producer, or importer of a carbon polluting substance; and (2) a carbon equivalency fee on imports of carbon pollution-intensive goods.
Requires the Secretary of the Treasury to transfer 50% of the amounts received each fiscal year as a result of the carbon equivalency fee to the Administrator and to the Secretary of Transportation (DOT). Requires the Administrator to use such amounts to:
(1) provide amounts to state and local programs that assist communities in adapting to climate change, improving the resiliency of critical infrastructure, and protecting environmental quality and wildlife; and
(2) meet international commitments made by the United States to assist with climate change adaptation.
Requires the Secretary of Transportation to use such amounts to provide financial support:
(1) to state and local programs that assist communities in improving the resiliency of critical infrastructure, and
(2) for projects that provide preferential parking for carpools.
Authorizes appropriations to the Administrator in an amount equal to a specified portion of the amounts received as a result of the carbon pollution fee to provide a monthly residential environmental rebate to legal U.S. residents. Requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations to establish an Office of Environmental Rebate Advocate to assist households with accessing and using the residential environmental rebate program.
Establishes the Pollution Reduction Trust Fund to be used to facilitate the implementation of the carbon pollution reduction program.
Directs the Administrator to establish the Sustainable Technologies Finance Program to provide financial assistance for projects that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to repeal the exemption from restrictions on underground injection of fluids or propping agents granted to hydraulic fracturing operations relating to oil and gas production activities under such Act.
Requires state underground injection programs to direct a person conducting hydraulic fracturing operations to disclose: (1) before the commencement of such operations, the chemicals intended for use in underground injections; and (2) after the end of such operations, the chemicals actually used.
Requires the applicable person using hydraulic fracturing, when a medical emergency exists and the proprietary chemical formula of a chemical used in such hydraulic fracturing is necessary for medical treatment, to disclose such formula or the specific chemical identity of a trade secret chemical to the state, the Administrator, or the treating physician or nurse upon request, regardless of the existence of a written statement of need or a confidentiality agreement.
Authorizes such person to require the execution of such statement and agreement as soon as practicable.
Directs the Administrator to prescribe an underground injection control program for a state, if the Administrator disapproves a state's program. Repeals provisions concerning optional demonstrations to the Administrator by states that show the effectiveness of such state programs relating to oil or natural gas.
Authorizes civil penalties for violations of underground injection requirements.
Requires the Administrator to: (1) report on the quantity of fugitive methane emissions resulting from any leak in natural gas infrastructure, and (2) enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to report on the quantity of U.S. GHG emissions not covered by a program under this Act and recommendations for programs to reduce such emissions.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the United States should carry out activities to ensure that, by January 1, 2050, the total quantity of GHG emissions released in the United States is reduced by not less than 80% of the emissions released during 2005.

The actual things he wants to do?

You would see that Bernie allows fracking as long as its regulated. Just like Hillary.

NO

The question was what he proposes to do about climate change. What ideas does he have?

They were given but you people seem to want to ignore and twist answers you are given.

You want to say his ideas were bad and state why? Fine go ahead. But these silly deflections are ridiculous.

Because uh...they need to steal the ideas for the possible debate that may take place sometime before the election, provided hillary says it's ok.

That's when she told us she would inform us of her position on Keystone.

Just wants it regulated, like Hillary?

But he is - despite the stereotype of his detractors - receptive to compromise, and accepting things he does not like forvthe sake of getting what hevbelieves is important in the larger sense.

You posted his signature legislation and it says fracking will be allowed, but regulated.

I already responded to the substance. Your mileage may vary. have a nice day.

Maybe Bing is okay.











heh

and one cosponsored with Hillary passes, as does one with cosponsored with Menendez.

"He has a record of really strong advocacy for solar in particular." Advocay doesn't seem to be translating to much accomplished.

And the ine cosponsored with Hillary was kind if an Apple pie one

Doesn't bode well in fulfilling any campaign promises then, does it?

Maybe even less so, because there is not the animosity towards Sanders that there is to Clinton.

The GOP will attack and try to scuttle any Democrstic president. Bbut thats no reason to automatically assume everything will fail.

In either case, Sanders has just as much of a chance to get things done as Hillary.

she hasn't made pie in the sky campaign promises that never have the hope of seeing the light of day.

Bernie blew it in that respect.

When the Republicans are going to get around to it...if Bernie feels like a threat to them, they will attack with their large loud misinformtion machine, including Fox et al about Bernie and socialism. If Bernie were to ever make it to the Whitehouse, there will NEVER be a Republican that will agree on any of his policies...they cannot take the chance of appearing to side with a Socialist to their constituency.

He is not some wild eyed fanatic who breathes fire all the time

In his home state he proved that he could work with business interests that opposed him. He also knows how Congress works and has successfully worked with Dems and Repubs on many issues.

I strongly disagree with your interpretation that he is overpromising, any more than any candidates do. They all say "When I am elected we'll have a chicken in every pot."

But while making stump speeches he is also uniquelly honest about the core problems we are facing. He doesn't just blsme things on the "other party" but addresses the systemic causes.

He also (as did OBama) make it clear that he could not donit alone, and it requires the active engagement ofveveryone.

for you.


My opinion isn't swayed.

just dialoguing, and expressing how Sanders supporters (at least this one) see things.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=480568

Was just asking for his detailed plan for his presidency.

I see a lot of it during this primary campaign.

Some of Bernie's supporters are so odd it's like reading their posts thru' my Dr. Seuss glasses, that I got for my birthday when I was 5 years old. Except while not actually wearing them!

Amazing glasses, by the way. With them on I can distinguish among the kinds.

Sanders, Boxer Outline ‘Gold Standard’ Climate Bill
A price on carbon would fund investments in clean energy under the new plan.



http://www.thenation.com/article/sanders-boxer-outline-gold-standard-climate-bill/


PDF summary from the senate website:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/021413-2pager.pdf

Hillary campaigned on cap and trade and her new proposal also cuts tax breaks to fund investment in clean energy. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-lays-out-climate-change-plan.html?referrer=

Sanders/Boxer Climate Legislation summary:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/021413-2pager.pdf

Here's some more on the solar side of things.

Sanders Introduces Solar Initiative
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/sanders-introduces-solar-initiative

I think these are at least as detailed as the NY times article you linked to

Sanders/Boxer Climate Legislation summary:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/021413-2pager.pdf

Here's some more on the solar side of things.

Sanders Introduces Solar Initiative
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/sanders-introduces-solar-initiative

so I don't think posting the links again will do much good.

Just guessing.

I can offer an entertaining gif, though.

You've been answered time and again. It's pretty clear that you're just pushing a line of BS.

A bill is the strongest plan you can have

Feb 14, 2013 113th Congress, 2013–2015
Status: Died in a previous Congress

This bill was introduced on February 14, 2013, in a previous session of Congress, but was not enacted.

I see she has been taking money from global energy corporations.

Testify!

http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-smart-energy-innovation/

Prioritizing cleaner energy worldwide. Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department joined the Department of Energy and other U.S. government agencies in a regional partnership with countries in North, Central, and South America and the Caribbean to promote clean energy development and smarter growth policies. Through this program, the U.S. has collaborated with other countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promoted cleaner energy through the Peace Corps, and connected public and private-sector officials across the hemisphere with renewable energy companies in America.

Getting smarter energy projects off the ground in Africa. Hillary Clinton helped launch a new partnership – the U.S.-Africa Clean Energy Finance Initiative – to jump-start private sector investment in cleaner energy projects and sustainable development across Africa. Funding provided through the initiative sparked wind, solar and hydro-powered projects in several African nations bringing electricity to thousands of homes.

Finding common goals with China to address access to reliable, sustainable, and affordable energy. Hillary Clinton spearheaded U.S. relations with China to enhance cooperation on climate change, energy and the environment. Under bilateral agreements, the U.S. and China established frameworks for increasing access to reliable, sustainable, and affordable energy as well as connecting businesses and government to support energy and environmental goals.

http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-fueling-americas-energy-future/

Sec. Clinton promoted U.S. development of clean energy projects for Caribbean nations through the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas. In her remarks on the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas, Sec. Clinton said, “First, we will work to advance sustainable energy in the Caribbean. As I said, this is the area of the world most dependent on imported fossil fuels and suffering from the world’s highest electricity rates. That’s shameful in our hemisphere, and it shouldn’t be. The people of the Caribbean are creative, resilient; they’re able to lead the way in new forms of energy, and we want to be a partner. The United States will provide a grant to the Organization of American States to lend technical and legal expertise to any Caribbean country seeking to help get clean energy projects off the ground. We are committed to helping you with energy security. We think clean energy and energy security go hand in hand.” [Remarks on the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas, state.gov, 4/15/10]

That's her international climate history & legacy!


How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking To The World
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/10/hillary-clinton-fracking_n_5796786.html


How Hillary Clinton's State Department Sold Fracking to the World
A trove of secret documents details the US government's global push for shale gas.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron

How Hillary Clinton's State Department sold fracking to the world.
A trove of secret documents details the US government’s global push for shale gas,
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/10/how-hillary-clintons-state-department-sold-fracking-to-the-world

I was about to post the same links.

as soon as she's elected.


Without a doubt the best, most fucking awesome, perfect post in the history of posts here on DU.

And thanks to the others in this thread who have demonstrated that Sanders has crafted legislation to address climate change. It's amusing that he forced Republican representatives to go on record as deniers and pretenders. It's a beautiful thing.

His positions aren't always bite-worthy, but there is a wealth of information about his position should one choose to do the research. Asking questions is a good thing.

It's actually pretty typical. Simplistic, a bit of rant, no real action. Bernie offered a minor effort to get solar energy to poor people that failed. Nothing of a national or international impact.

By now, it should be obvious that stirring up a hornet's nest by debating the language "climate change is real" is a waste of time, guaranteed to get some people air time, and destroy any chance to work with others and pass something meaningful.

-----------------------------------

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/249631-senate-panel-rejects-sanders-climate-change-push
Sanders rebuffed on amendment stating climate change is real

A Senate panel on Wednesday rejected a push from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to acknowledge climate change in an energy reform bill.

Sanders, who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, had pushed an amendment to the chamber’s energy bill affirming the sense of Congress that climate change is real and that more needs to be done in the energy sphere to confront it.

“I think, for those who are planning to vote against the amendment, speak to your kids, think about your grandchildren,” Sanders said at an Energy and Natural Resources Committee mark-up. “Because I think that history will record you on the very, very, very wrong side of this enormous issue.”
The whole Senate voted on similar climate change resolutions earlier this year. Democrats on the committee, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), spoke in favor of Sanders's proposal, even as they noted that the measure was a mostly symbolic addition to the energy package.

Ahead of the climate change and natural gas export debates, that mood was present on Wednesday. Before the committee rejected a Sanders measure to provide grants for low-income families to buy solar panels for their homes, Murkowski joked that the proposal’s acronym — "LISA" — might be a long-shot play to try winning her support.

He has introduced or co-sponsored numerous legislation with specific actions. SPECIFIC!

It is not his fault the Congress is bought and sold.

We are all entitled to our opinions on whether the proposals he is on record as supporting are good or bad. But at least do a modicum of research to find out that they fucking exist first.

Bernie's record shows that other Senators don't usually support his ideas. Thirty years and a fairly low rating of successful sponsor and cosponsor success.

His ideas are usually simple and unrealistic. Even this report where he jokes that LISA was the name of the bill so he hoped he could get some votes.

He rarely or never considers (for example with the energy committee in this case), that international cooperation is the ONLY way to have an effective energy policy.

You can chalk it up to "Congress is bought and sold", but today is the 50 anniversary of Medicare. I remember my father (an MD) ranting that Medicare was a communist program because "Congress is bought and sold"! That goes back the earliest days of the republic. Early recordings of Bernie sound almost identical decades ago. Heck, I met Jimmy Carter in the 70's running on a campaign that included getting rid of big money (and he put solar panels on the White House).

If you want to DO something about Congress, then support Hillary's plan to fix voting rights, a path to citizenship for millions of undocumented Americans, and appoint better SC judges. That is a platform that could turn around all these state elections and governorships and Tea Party Congress. I noticed that Bernie has now added voting rights into his stump speech.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=481649

the same things have needed to be said.

And yes, if he sounds the same today that's simply because the problems he was working to bring out into the open are still around, and have gotten worse. Not becaise of him and other progressives who have been sounding the alarm for years. It's because the system has been rigged against the poor, working and middle classes for too long.

While Bill Clinton and the other "centrist" Democrats were praising right wing free-market cultist Alan Greenspan as a great Fed Reserve chair, Bernie was grilling him and pointing out what was happening to American incomes and jobs, and predicting exactly what subsequently happened. He stood up against deregulation, "free trade" and the other corporatist and Wall St. scams that led to the subsequent collapse of markets and loss of jobs, etc. ....He talked about climate change when few others did....etc. etc. etc.

Yes -- The corrupt Congress and corrupt administrations did knock the slats out from under us. And YES, too many Democrats chose to heed their Big Money backers rather than support Bernie's bills on these issues and things like climate change. That is EXACTLY the problem many people are no trying to fix by supporting Sanders. It;s not a cult of personality. It's supporting a guy who has worked hard to bring out issues that should have been handled much better all along.

Sure I support gthose good things Hillary does too. But please don't mis characterize and mislabel what people like Sanders are saying and doing, and dismissing it with the same tired old Centrist cliches that got us into this mess.

Why tilt at windmills?

Hillary realizes that maybe 30 million Americans are undocumented, and many were brought here as children. If they vote, the entire Sunbelt from Florida to California may turn blue.

Also, Hillary sees the relatively recent attempts by ALEC to keep people from registering, keep people from the poles, keep felons from voting, and make ID requirements prohibitive. She knows that automatic registration to vote, a path to citizenship, voting without having to wait in line, and long early voting period are ALL the way to actually turn the entire US blue. If her realistic plan is implemented, the GOP will not control Congress and the states for the first time in many years.

Her call to expand voting rights will be hard for even the GOP to oppose - because courts may side with her, it will be popular with some conservatives like the Tea Party, and the repubs are running out of excuses to oppose VOTING.

Hillary's first announcement - to expand registration and voting plus add a path to citizenship is brilliant, and it holds the possibility to actually make real change. 2018 could be an all Democratic Congress - not to mention turning over 5-10 governorships. That's not "centrist" - it's a great progressive idea.

It may be a quiet "revolution" but that's the real revolution that is possible.

I still believe in the political process. And I see some signs of life in it. Especially the wave that Sanders kicked into gear.

But they only count if we have enough politicians who are willing to chalkenge the mold snd step outbof the the revolving door between Government and Big Business that has blockefd progress for average people and the disadvantaged....undermined the underpinnings of the broadly based economy while concentratting wealth...Eliminating small and mid sized business by allowing huge monopolies to form....etc. etc. etc.

We need change, not more of the same. In my opinion, although she is infinatly better thsn most Repubs, Hillary is too locked into that corrupt system to actually challenge it on any meaningful level

I think we changed the system in a lot of ways in the late 60s, early 70s. I was glad to be there on the front lines for a lot of fights. There was too much complacency in the 80s and 90s.

If you put the populist Bernie movement together with the Tea Party, you could say there's a subset of activists who want SOMETHING to change. It is yet to be seen if there is a majority of voters who would go for outlier candidates. Neither extreme really holds enough traction to do more than have an effect on the positions of the main parties. Clearly the Tea Party has been more successful at electing extreme conservatives than the socialist democrats have been at electing progressives. I don't see Hillary as "evil" or Bernie as free from influence as you do, but that's typical on DU.

As far as "centrist" Democrats go, they are the majority of voters regardless of party, but their voice is rarely heard because of gerrymandering and voter manipulation by the GOP.

I think that there is corruption in Congress, but it's not all "Wall Street". The undue sources of money and influence include Wall Street corporations (Romney), but also the Koch Brother types (libertarians, Rand Paul), the Texas energy folks (Bushes), the Military complex (Cheney et. al), some internationals (China, Israel), the NRA, and tech giants. Going after all of the gang will not be easy unless there is an overwhelming change in Congress and the states.

...I heard he marched with Woodsy Owl back in '68

or is that someone else?

I know it's not part of the talking points for supporters, but it's best to keep the records straight and up front.

I'm not your upaid intern

With the vast majority coming from unions, liberal interests, individuals, and scattered donations from various business donors.

If you have some awful smoking gun you found on there, then you should give a specific link.

purists state he never takes money from XXXXX industries, when of course he does. Purists want certain PAC money to be returned by candidates depending on the source as has been required of Hillary but not of Bernie.

I am pointing out the stupidity of such double standards. Just hopeing that one day it will sink in that no candidate can take money from PACs and since it's not their money to take the candidtate cannot return anything.

As for the amount of PAC money from energy donated to the Bernie cause.....these numbers do not reflect the current election cycle. They are lifetime donation, so as of today the amount may or may not be "miniscule". All I can tell you is that the money was donated with Bernie's name attached and he didn't return it.

As you will also not on Open Secrets...unions have also donate to Hillary, so there is that.

It's a matter of how much, and what strings are attached, and how a candidate (his/her organization) actively encourages them, within the bounds of the law.

Don't make statements you're unwilling to support

to pretend the info is not easily available is just your way of pretending the purity test still stands. Sticking you head in the sand doesn't make the info disappear.

Armstead was able to find it easily enough...are you willing to tell Armstead to slink for not posting the link? You should you know, otherwise you may be considered as taking a hypocritical stand here.

and Fracking?

The OP knows as well.

This OP is a sad attempt to rile the Beristas

Attacking a candidate on their strengths
is a well known tactic of right-wingers.

It allows them to hide the weakness
of their own candidate or policies.

Squirrel!!!

See post 11 for his bill. He doesn't ban fracking, just wants it regulated, like Hillary.

It'll be interesting if it gets down to Hillary vs Bernie how she'll spin Bernie's simple declarative sentences against him while she supports the ones whut brung her to the dance. I think Hillary might flame out spectacularly over these inconvenient stances of hers and we'll get a Biden/Sanders ticket.

http://www.vox.com/2015/7/28/9014491/bernie-sanders-vox-conversation

Take all of his comments over the last fifty years on the topic, and that is his plan. Very similar to the rest of his plans.

I'm sure as the campaign goes on Bernie will be doing the usual "position papers" etc that all candidates do.

In the meantime, he has done and said a massive amount, and his speeches encapsulate them into a coherent message and plan.

It;s fine to disagree with all or some of his positions. But please don't mischaracterize him or his supporters in the process with empty deflections based on tactics and style over substance. If you don;t see substance it's because you choose not to.

I didn't even reference his supporters so I have no clue how you came to your conclusion.

But I will say that if you complain that he has no "plan" therefore no substance, that is mischaracterization and deflection.

There is plenty out there on the record of actions, proposals, speeches, interviews, etc, to get a very clear idea of his policies.

I have no problem with people who might disagree or criticize those. But i do have a problem with misleading deflections that -- because he has not yet issued a specific "white paper" with a pretty bow around it that he has no real policies or proposals.

I think that's the formula, isn't it?

and establish a pattern of behavior, and that is the plan.

It's a good thing that Climate change, the culprits and the fixes have never changed over the last 50 years or Bernie would have had to evolve on the subject matter...can't have any evolving on the matter.

The problem is whether or not the "evolution" is credible. If people don't think you're honest or trustworthy, they're not going to believe you've evolved.

She is never allowed or permitted to evolve on a policy or topic...because Bernie was always that was since the dawn of time....or at least since he marched with MLK.