STARTING NOW: Hear from @Blitterman, @RepRooney, Matt Sonnesyn, @CFTCbehnam, and @khilldavis as they discuss implications of climate change risk to the U.S. financial system.
"From a political and from a 'what's right' point of view, climate change is a central issue. Republicans have left the discussion entirely, but Florida is ground zero. People are starting to realize that." - @RepRooney
.@Blitterman: "Climate is a risk management problem. And when you look at it from that perspective, a lot of things become very clear. For one, we don't have the right incentives...the first recommendation of this report is that the U.S. has to price carbon."
"Time is not on our side. When it comes to risk management, we can solve anything with enough time. But we've seen it with COVID-19. A one-week delay was a disaster...with climate change, every 3 years of delay is 1/10th of a degree higher. That's a liability for our kids."
"One of the principle concerns...is thinking about our competitiveness in this space...The costs of climate change are not zero, and businesses are starting to quantify these costs more and more." - Matt Sonnesyn of @BizRoundtable.
Matt Sonnesyn: The U.S. and Europe are generally going in the right direction of bringing emissions down. It's a different story for the developing world. That's why a price signal is crucial to driving innovation to bring down the costs of reducing emissions.
.@Blitterman: "Any factor that impacts the return of a portfolio needs to be taken into account. Climate is no exception."
.@RepRooney: "7 out of 10 millennials vigorously oppose offshore drilling. And Republicans are not paying attention.
I'd like to see more young people write op-eds, etc. They can catalyze change, if they mobilize."
.@RepRooney: It's up to the Senate to catalyze change. Some Members don't believe change is possible, even if they see the consequences of climate change. And ultimately, many Members are going to have to break through the ideologies and pressures coming from their leadership."
That's a wrap! Thanks to everyone who participated. We'll have a recording live on the site later this week.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
.@heritage publishes regular iterations of its “Mandate for Leadership” with an agenda for the next Republican administration. The prior Trump admin implemented nearly 64% of its recommendations in its 1st year.
First, the Mandate would effectively close many avenues of legal immigration by:
❌Halting H2 visa programs
❌Closing the H-1B visa program to most recent grads
❌Leveraging entire visa categories as collateral in foreign policy negotiations
It would sabotage U.S. humanitarian relief by:
❌Repealing all TPS designations, stripping almost 700,000 of legal protection + work authorization.
❌Forbidding use of DHS staff time on DACA, Uniting for Ukraine, etc.
❌Prohibiting refugee vetting, ending refugee resettlement.
NEW PAPER: Manufactured housing is an affordable option in rural areas where land prices are low. They even promise to ease the housing crunch in coastal cities where land prices are high!
To clarify, we’re not talking about vacation trailers, or 1970’s-era mobile homes. Modern manufactured homes have strict standards for structural integrity and safety. They often look like homes built on-site, but they were assembled in a factory, like a car or an airplane.
Benefits of manufactured homes include: (1) They’re safer and more efficient to make, their materials don’t have to be exposed to the elements until the house is fully assembled, and (3) they can help improve quality of housing while driving costs down.
Before we enact any reform, we have to understand the political economy of our system: whom it empowers, whom it enriches, etc.
Answering these questions will rally opinion shapers around reform, protect reforms against backlash, and help avoid unintended consequences.
Here's how the conventional wisdom explains the political economy of housing: single-family homes and large lot sizes restrict the availability of housing to buyers who will pay at least as much in local taxes as they consume in public services, such as schools.
THREAD: The cost of building public transit is out of control. We can do something about that:
Stop relying on outside consultants to do the work of government agencies. slate.com/business/2023/…
In the name of cutting costs, we’ve hollowed out government agencies, asking full-time employees to handle impossible tasks.
The result? Chaos. And lots of wasted taxpayer dollars. (After all, government contractors arguably cost even more money).
.@alon_levy produced a report for us outlining some solutions:
(1) The federal government should require that state/local transportation agencies demonstrate they already have the capacity to oversee big infrastructure projects before releasing funds. niskanencenter.org/report-so-you-…