I will have a bit more on this tomorrow, but I just want to provide a thought (or three) about this week’s news that Senator Manchin has refused to support climate activities in an already scaled-back spending bill. A couple of these thoughts might be controversial, but I’m exploring the implications just like you, and I want my responses on this to be honest as I see it at the moment.
The first thing I want to say is that Manchin said he wouldn’t support the bill right now. Meaning, he didn’t disagree with the policy provisions (at least on paper), but he wanted to see what inflation was doing before saying yes to a broad package. The proposed spending on the climate piece would be around $375 billion. Manchin’s claim is that he didn’t want to add government spending fuel to the inflation fire.
I have to say….I get this response. It’s hard to justify more government spending when inflation is so high. Annnnnnd, inflation is not likely the result of solely (or even mainly) government spending as much as it is about supply bottlenecks and corporate profits, so….I also don’t get this.
I especially don’t get this response from Manchin when he also denied the proposal to impose a minimum global corporate tax rate of 15% (15%!! less than most of us pay in individual income tax), and denied increasing taxes on the wealthy. All of which would, of course, help pay for the bill, have no impact on inflation, and would have no impact on wealthy Americans’ ability to buy groceries.
So it doesn’t really make sense. I do hope that he revisits his support when Congress comes back from recess because the provisions in the bill really will help most of us live better lives, and not just less carbon-intensive lives.
For example, auto-manufacturers are moving towards electrification regardless of what Manchin says or does. It will not only lower carbon emissions from cars but will lower other point-source pollution in cities that causes poor air quality. So, we will need the public infrastructure and some tax or other incentives to help us take advantage of that electrified transportation as quickly as possible, especially as increased heat in cities makes air pollution more concerning for those with respiratory challenges or other risk factors.
And increasing the deployment of renewables, especially small scale residential renewables, helps us become more resilient, with more reliable power in the face of grid disruptions - such as from climate extremes like heatwaves, ice storms, and wildfires.
The benefit from smart climate policy almost always goes beyond simply climate benefit.
Anyway, my other comment for now, is that we need to stop giving Manchin either the credit or the blame for passing any policy. He’s allowed to be ‘moderate’ or even conservative when he feels it necessary. He represents West Virginia, and (while it’s hard to tell what is genuine moderateness vs bending towards his big money donors), I would frankly expect him to cross the center line occasionally. I think we have to stop acting shocked that a Democrat from a largely republican state would support a sometimes more conservative approach.
In the long-term, we benefit from a range of positions within each party (in fact it’s kind of weird to me that each party votes en masse). We may not like it, but that’s why we vote for our representatives. If we broadly support a certain approach - for health care, environment, economy or whatever, then we need to vote people in who will carry that approach forward. Instead of blaming Manchin, perhaps we should look at how we can get more people to vote so that it doesn’t come down to one dude’s reticence on specific policies.
And my third comment is why isn’t there a single Republican who is coming out in support of any part of this spending bill? Extending tax credits ought to be a no-brainer (as one example). If this stripped back, pared down, watery version of a spending bill doesn’t get a single Republican vote….I think we have to ask why they’re even taking up a seat. And I mean this not as a liberal entreaty, but a republican one too - we need conservatives willing to act in support of fair and reasonable policy, even when it’s introduced by the majority and you are in the (just barely) minority. Debate! Amend! Make it watery if you must. And then pass the bill. That is your job.
Perhaps we have enough incentives to get more people to the ballot box this fall so that we have representatives who are willing to actually work on our behalf? Including our present and future climate behalf.
Tomorrow, I’ll say a few words about good work happening despite the lack of federal action on climate. Lots of good leadership exists elsewhere that is making, and will continue to make, a huge difference.
Thanks for this. Better than my simple fury!
I appreciate your balanced view, and also how you share the clear facts and their implication for the climate moving forward. So much more awareness is needed on these issues! It's so helpful to have a trusted source. Thank you.