,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
I want to return to this @drvox thread on why the climate bill failed in 2009-10; he thinks the lessons make the case for a Green New Deal, and so do I 1/
Waxman-Markey wasn't an idealistic attempt to achieve the politically impossible; it tried to buy off interest groups by giving them the emission rights under cap and trade. But its pragmatism was aimed at appeasing industry, not getting public buy-in 2/
What we need, then, is something that gives ordinary people a stake in climate legislation. Yet like @drvox, I don't think a carbon tax redistributed as a dividend to the public would do the job. Why? Because it wouldn't generate enough intensity 3/
Think of the political failure of the Trump tax cut. yes, it was terrible policy. But it did give many voters a little bit of a cut. Yet the sums involved were small, and most people didn't even notice them 4/
I think the same thing would happen to a redistributed carbon tax. Some people would be furious -- think of the yellow vests in France -- while the broad public wouldn't notice their gains. To work, climate action has to be linked to things that loom large in people's lives 5/
That's why it's a good idea to link NYC's new congestion charge to subway repair and renovation. And since a carbon tax is a much bigger thing, it would need to be sold as part of major program of life-changing investments 6/
Hence the Green New Deal. In the end, I expect and hope that a carbon tax will end up being part of that program. But the program has to deliver a lot to make people accept that tax 7/
