Profile picture
🗳 Talk to Voters 🔥 @MaxDunitz
, 48 tweets, 11 min read Read on Twitter
thirteen years later, america is screwed up, just like bernie goldberg predicted
I'm sad I can't walk into an American library right now
Okay, I've read enough Wikipedia talk pages. I'll continue the thread.
First, I was surprised the story got any attention at all. I certainly wasn't expecting to see our pictures in the paper or Daniel on NECN. Our goal was not attention, it was simply this:

bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/10/…
But I do realize that "MIT" and "millennial" both attract media attention. Being white guys didn't hurt. Everyone here in France knows about the Parkland teens, but nobody I talk to has heard of Moms Demand Action.

(A reporter tried to interview me on an "elder day of action.")
There is a mass movement of badass middle-aged women changing our country and that is in my view the key story right now. When possible I pass the mic to them. But I was happy to talk to reporters this time to get more people to read about Speaker DeLeo's climate inaction.
(Fossil Free MIT had a further contradiction: uh...skeptical that any institution with David Koch as a lifetime board member is acting in the public interest and worthy of so much respect in the media, we used the media's adoration of MIT to spread the climate-action message.)
That's another story. The story of the nonbinding policy question actually begins with the guy who kept me away from the 2014 climate march in New York with Fossil Free MIT folks for a really cool money-in-politics conference and hackathon.
A few years back I knew Massachusetts corruption was legendary, and I knew the saga of the clean elections bill, but I also knew Massachusetts as a pioneer in marriage equality and near-universal healthcare. So with the exception of the US Senate I focused on other states.
It was @dansplain (an MIT student!) who got me to think about holding Democrats in Massachusetts accountable. He was a leader of the Represent.Us MA-07 group (which was meeting at MIT!), which put an anti-corruption act on the 2014 ballot in DeLeo's district.
It passed by a 45-point margin--a slightly higher margin than the margin by which DeLeo got reelected. Naturally, Speaker DeLeo began the 189th General Court obeying his constituents' instructions to pass publicly funded legislative elections and a five-year lobbying ban.
I'm just kidding, he got rid of the term limits he had imposed on himself when he (controversially!) became speaker because he was beginning the last session for which he was eligible to be speaker under his rules.

(Sources: wbur.org/news/2015/01/2…, wbur.org/news/2015/01/2…)
Ok, but surely he had so many "fresh ideas" bubbling up he needed more time to implement them all! California passed a steady stream of bold climate bills after their landmark AB32, surely he must have been doing the same in Massachusetts.
Indeed, clean energy used to be the number one legislative accomplishment in his official biography. It's dropped down on the page but surely these must be ambitious policies if we are indeed--as he claims--"lead[ing] the nation" in clean energy!

malegislature.gov/Legislators/Pr…
His main clean-energy legacy is killing 3000 solar jobs in 2017 while, in an incredible series of coincidences, receiving 6 maximum contributions from Eversource execs (and at least one more from a spouse) in the first OCPF report of 2017.

The Bay State is leading the nation!
Those data were taken from the Solar Foundation's solar census (March 2018 update). The campaign finance data were taken from OCPF.us but I don't want to screencap it, which would reveal the executives' personal information.
Why were all these jobs lost in 2016? His great solar bill in 2016 (which really seemed to get momentum because it was becoming clear that Massachusetts might not bring emissions down to the GWSA's 2020 emissions limit) didn't raise net metering caps, which killed jobs.
It also dialed some solar net metering payments back to 60% of the retail, a number that has nothing to to with the economics of energy markets and everything to do with lining Eversource's pockets. (If I talk about the rate hike I'll never get to sleep.)
In this video, Speaker DeLeo brags about "bring[ing] business to the table" and the process by which AIM signs off on the bill after member companies brought up concerns and the bill got "improved."

It's fine to bring business to the table. But Speaker DeLeo's house is not some beautifully orchestrated negotation between all the factions.

THE 60% NUMBER IS SO OBVIOUSLY BULLSHIT IF ANYBODY BUT BUSINESS WERE AT THE TABLE IT WOULD NOT BE LAW.
Ugh, that grammar. Allow me to edit, jack &c.

Utilities are good at convincing legislators that somehow solar producers aren't "paying their fair share" of the fixed costs and that their bill could get zeroed out, penalizing their neighbors.
This is utter nonsense. In theory, to zero out a bill, one would have to provide far more electricity than one consumes. But this misses the point.

Solar helps balance the grid at current levels of solar penetration in the Bay State.
The full value of solar, which hasn't to my knowledge been estimated by the state, has been found to be at or above the retail rate in every state with a similar profile that has measured it.
Solar power delivered to the grid during peak generation hours brings more value to the grid than the energy alone.

The state won't have to depend on peaker plants to meet peak demand. There's less line loss and wear on the grid. And the (costly) energy transition is happening!
Speaker DeLeo--whether he meant to or not--literally made you pay more money for dirtier energy.
I'll avoid talking about wind (other than to say look at the U of Delaware study and look at what the senate passed and you'll conclude that Bob DeLeo's contribution to offshore wind was -400 MW) and fast-forward to the next session. ceoe.udel.edu/File%20Library…
The senate passed unanimously--with all seven Republicans voting in favor--a comprehensive clean energy bill. It had carbon pricing and environmental justice protections, and it required the state to do modeling and analysis to come up with a clean energy roadmap.
(quick side note on environmental justice: the 60% net metering reduction applied to low-income solar projects but not single-family residential solar)
Why a road map? The state needs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the carbon equivalent of burning two tanks of gas per year. Easy, right? Well, this needs to happen each year for 30 consecutive years to get from the 2020 limit to the 2050 limit. Lemon difficult!
Getting to 2022 or 2024 might be doable but very quickly it becomes very difficult to see how the state is going to decarbonize. It won't be possible if the grid isn't almost entirely carbon-free within two decades AND home heating and transportation aren't mostly electrified.
This is a big transition and having the state set interim limits and sector-specific limits and do modeling and analysis to figure out the most cost-effective ways to do the transition is pretty important. Massachusetts needs a green jobs program, and the right market mechanisms.
It's a pretty basic first step to even do modeling and analysis and it hasn't been done. Bob DeLeo has given the Bay State one lost decade since the GWSA was passed and he seems to be in no rush to act.
The senate passed a pretty cool consensus economy-wide clean energy bill and the house didn't consider it.

Instead the house passed an electricity bill. Some of it's kind of new interesting policy ideas, some of it is a step in the wrong direction and a giveaway to utilities.
But most importantly was its lack of ambition. It only applied to electricity and it would only get the Bay State to 100% renewable electricity (for some definition of renewable) by 2095. This is not "leading the nation." (Well if Daniel thinks "out west" means the Berkshires...)
(I should also note that there are other policies that affect carbon emissions on the grid so the situation is not necessarily that dire but it's still bad.)

Rep. Kay Khan had a good amendment to get to 100% renewable electricity by mid-century, around when California will.
Cool. But if I understand correctly she withdrew it. How did Speaker DeLeo make that happen? Well, I would not like to have been, on that wall, one of the few species of flies that can sense sound pressure.
It seems that a couple of people are reading my thread.

I'm not a grid expert: I'm an EE grad student, but not that kind. I blew out my radio after plugging it into a French outlet with a plug adapter. I read MA climate lists and uh that scary Ted Koppel cyber book. That's it.
The session that began with Speaker DeLeo giving himself a massive pay hike in an undemocratic fashion (it was tied to an excluded matter under Amendment Article 48) giving him more power over the pay of people in his chamber ended with him yet again blocking major climate action
This cannot keep happening. Speaker DeLeo's constituents have instructed him by a 46-point margin to pass climate legislation and by a 32-point margin to abolish his term limits. Tell your reps that they should not vote for DeLeo if he won't follow his instructions.
I'm sorry it's very late here. To **reinstate** his eight-year term limits.
You can call 1-8-HI-DELEO-HI (if Democrats Abroad's phonebanks haven't emptied my Twilio account) to connect to his office. Tell him to follow his voters' instructions.
I was asked by the Globe why I sought to "troll (and presumably rattle)" the speaker. I told the interviewer that I did not intend or expect to rattle the speaker.

(I didn't think it would get media coverage. My main hope was to get his constituents to call.)
I can't get inside DeLeo's head but I told the reporter I didn't think DeLeo be rattled because in 2014 he did not follow the instructions his constituents gave him (by a 45-point margin--and we didn't campaign!) via @dansplain/Represent.US's public policy question.
It's reasonable to wonder, based on his actions, whether he might be rattled if AIM tells him he's not a "partner" or something. But it's hard to believe he is easily rattled by his constituents' opinion if he completely ignored it in the past.
But I hope he does get "rattled" if it means he passes a serious climate bill.

Unless he has no access to good information about the climate and his constituents have shared no concerns about their annual flooding, he's made it clear he will not act unless he is rattled.
I don't like the idea of rattling anyone. I think Bob DeLeo's probably a nice guy to many people. But he's been a disaster for the climate.
It's been 10 years since the passage of the GWSA and Massachusetts still has no roadmap for meeting the 2050 emissions limits. No plan for transportation, no plan for installing heat pumps.

Tell your reps ten years is too long to wait for change. Tell your reps to rattle DeLeo.
And also it's time to #DoYourJobBob. Stop taking contributions from the biggest polluters in the state. Start protecting Bay Staters.

And pay attention to the instructions your voters gave you. They want clean elections, not a rep who raises half a million a year for no election
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to 🗳 Talk to Voters 🔥
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member and get exclusive features!

Premium member ($30.00/year)

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!