,
11 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
A goal isn't an alternative to an economy-wide mobilization? nytimes.com/2019/07/23/cli…
Is this a joke or did I have an aneurysm and wake up in 2015? 
Frank Pallone, with all the enthusiasm of a tranquilized horse: "The idea is to achieve a consensus, hopefully with Republicans as well."
An actual quote from this press conference: LET THE MARKET RESOLVE MANY OF THESE ISSUES
House Democrats bravely laying out the process by which we arrive at the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, with the exact same failed theory of change, in twenty fucking nineteen
These people are deeply, dangerously unserious. What they're effectively laying out is a series of hearings convening experts on decarbonization premised on gaining GOP support: the dumbest possible version of the mission outlined in the proposal for a Select Committee on the GND
Frank Pallone just said that bipartisan consensus is the scientific consensus and I'm going to throw my computer out of a window
I am incredibly curious how these committees will come up with a workable plan to decarbonize the US economy by 2050 that looks so drastically different from what's been outlined as part of a Green New Deal
"we need to build public support" say 6 mostly old men in an empty room
None of the vague policy options half-heartedly floated here are mutually exclusive with a Green New Deal, but holding climate policy hostage to bipartisan consensus with the political arm of the fossil fuel industry is mutually exclusive with decarbonizing by 2050
Frank Pallone's main talking point here: "The main thing is we try to come to a consensus," pretending like the GOP is a good faith negotiating partner on climate.
