How can we really even know what it is, when they rarely even mention ‘climate change’ while campaigning for the midterms? It’s about the least important issue for voters. And for those who care, the minute you explain it will cost them money and raise their cost of living they’re like “yeah, never mind”
Dems damp down hopes for climate change agenda
Democrats are unlikely to pursue major climate change legislation if they win the House majority, despite a growing body of evidence suggesting time is running out to address the issue.
This represents a shift in strategy from when House Democrats last controlled the chamber. In 2009, they passed cap-and-trade legislation, which subsequently died in the Democratic-controlled Senate. The game plan for next year, House Democrats say, is more incremental steps and hearings.
With President Trump in the White House and Republicans favored to keep the Senate next year, climate legislation would face stiff headwinds, and pushing it could spark backlash from the right — both now and after the Nov. 6 midterm elections.
Considering those “constraints,†said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), Democrats should “focus on the practical and the opportunistic†to make short-term progress while fighting for bolder measures — “the aspirational goals†— over the longer term.
Their aspirational goals are to implement a tax/fee scheme which enriches government coffers while instituting methods giving government more control over citizen’s lives.
The office of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), a fierce environmentalist who ushered the cap-and-trade bill through the lower chamber almost a decade ago, declined to comment about the Democrats’ future climate plans. Pelosi has been touring the country stumping for Democratic candidates, with a focus on economic and health-care issues. (snip)
Not all Democrats share that view. Faced with more data on a warming planet — and the role of human activity in exacerbating the trend — some lawmakers want the party to use its would-be majority to push a bold, sweeping package to hike the cost of carbon emissions. (snip)
“I do think we need to go big,†said Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.). “I’m all for incrementalism in policy. We do lots and lots of it, and it’s a good way to move forward. But this situation is so serious that we can’t do it in little steps.†(snip)
Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.), a co-chairman of the bipartisan, 90-member Climate Solutions Caucus, rejected the notion that pricing-up carbon is beyond reach, even in the current political environment. He’s pushing for a bipartisan carbon-fee bill that, if passed by the House, would then put pressure on Trump and Senate Republicans to act.
See, most Democrats are like Pelosi: they aren’t campaigning on anthropogenic climate change, and they barely, if ever, mention it in their speeches to their leftist peeps. But, they still want to push these Big Government solutions. Which is why, even though ‘climate change’ is typically one of the lowest polling cares for voters, you cannot ignore it. It’s a stealth issue that isn’t about science, but Big Government control.
Voters understand the Dem position on global warming.
Do voters understand the GOP stealth plan to dismantle Social Security and Medicare?
Why don’t the Repubs campaign on gutting these hugely popular programs? Strange, huh?
Voters vote R because they don’t want to be taxed to death. And they’re not campaigning on gutting entitlements because they don’t. Even McConnell says so.
As for little Jeffery’s fear-mongering (which is what the Demos always need), nobody is saying anything of the kind but him.
Yes, the current Dem position on gw is more taxes. Absent the gw scam, the Dem position is more taxes.