America’s Environmental Policy under a Biden presidency.
July 10, 2020
Anyone interested in a preview of what the Unites States of America could look like under a Joe Biden presidency, should analyse the proposed “Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force Recommendation.”
The 110-page document could become a major economic and societal concern for tens of millions of Americans should Biden cheat his way into victory and implement the proposed policies.
The Democrats’ recommendations contain key policies and programs that resemble a socialist’s blueprint to globalism.
Biden, being the inept and corrupt, decades-long career politician, is likely to endorse the policies listed at the behest of his handlers.
In this article, we’ll specifically focus on the proposed environmental policies.
Environmental and Climate Justice. Green New Deal 2.0?
Unsurprisingly, Democrats believe that “climate change is a global emergency” and that time is effectively running out. Therefore, something needs to be done with a sense of urgency, and the measures evidently need to be extreme.
Recent storms, wildfires, and floods, which caused the lives of thousands of Americans, are all Trump’s fault, according to the document. “President Trump still callously and willfully denies the science that explains why so many are suffering,” it states.
But fret not, because “Democrats believe there is a better way.” Their strategy, they believe, “will help rebuild our economy from the COVID-19 pandemic and President Trump’s recession by mobilizing historic, transformative public and private investments to launch a clean energy revolution.”
To do so, they plan on taking “immediate action to reverse the Trump Administration’s dangerous and destructive rollbacks of critical climate and environmental protections.”
Their first step would be to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, which Trump withdrew America from saving the nation a hefty $100 billion.
With Biden as president, the Paris Agreement would require America to “reduce emissions” through additional government regulations. Businesses would have to comply with strict government quotas, which could negatively impact the economy.
An article on Forbes explains how increased regulations have hurt America’s poor by reducing employment growth and business investment. These factors have also contributed to lower wages for workers.
One of the reasons why the U.S. economy boomed under Trump prior to COVID-19, was because of his administration’s deregulation efforts, which ultimately put an end to Obama’s overkill regulations that cost a staggering $122 billion annually, at one point.
Achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, and no later than 2050.
“Democrats commit to eliminating carbon pollution from power plants by 2035 through technology-neutral standards for clean energy and energy efficiency… Within five years, we will install 500 million solar panels, including eight million solar roofs and community solar energy systems, and 60,000 made-in-America wind turbines.”
Also, according to ScienceMag, solar panels are apparently worst than fuel for global warming. “Realistic large-scale solar panel coverage could cause less than half a degree of local warming, far less than the several degrees in global temperature rise predicted over the next century if we keep burning fossil fuels.”
So while this ambitious “net-zero greenhouse gas emissions” plan may be delivered with good intentions, it could very well end up counter-productive in the long run.
To push for such drastic new measures, more government regulations will have to be issued, which as we’ve already established, could hurt the economy the way it has in the past.
Furthermore, the whole climate change argument needs to be addressed more skeptically.
John Coleman, Founder of The Weather Channel, explains his skepticism in his 2014 interview with CNN’s Brian Stelter.
Coleman, who is a scientist, argued that climate change has become a “big political point of the Democratic party and part of their platform” and stated that “there is no significant man-made global warming.”
Stelter challenged the scientist with the notion that there is a general consensus among “97 percent of climate scientists.” Coleman rebutted the anchor’s claims, saying the figures are manipulated.
“The government puts out about $2.5 billion directly for climate research every year,” Coleman explained, “It only gives that money out to scientists who will produce scientific results that support the global warming hypothesis of the Democratic party.”
Coleman added that as a result, these same scientists don’t have a choice. “If you’re gonna get the money, you got to support their position,” he said, which is why 97 percent of the scientific reports published support global warming — because they are paid to do so.
Restoring US Global Leadership by Working with World Leaders.
“Finally, Democrats recognize that the United States does not stand alone in the fight against climate change and global environmental degradation. Beyond immediately rejoining the Paris 6 Climate Agreement, including the Green Climate Fund, and encouraging our partners and allies to increase their ambition to reduce their own carbon pollution.”
Democrats plan to get involved internationally by ensuring “that America’s service missions abroad, including those through the Peace Corps, Fulbright fellowships, and USAID, expand their calls to action to include reducing carbon pollution, safeguarding vulnerable populations from climate impacts, and ensuring a sustainable planet for all.”
In other words, billions of dollars of U.S. taxpayers’ money will be invested in other countries, who will ultimately also be forced to issue potentially job-killing regulations.
As of March 2020, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has a budget of $41 billion.
However, under Trump’s administration, “Budget Request supports the President’s commitment to serve the needs of American citizens, ensure their safety, promote their prosperity, preserve their rights, and defend their values, as outlined in the National Security Strategy (NSS).”
Should Joe Biden become the next president, those billions of dollars could very well end up in other nations’ pockets.