How Biden can make climate change a winning issue
In the home stretch of the 2020 campaign, presidential candidate Joe Biden leaned hard into the issue of climate change, giving a televised climate speech and running climate-focused ads in swing states. His campaign bet that this issue, once considered politically risky, would now be a winner.
Public demand for climate action is swelling. According to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, a majority of Americans are either “alarmed” or “concerned” about climate change. The Environmental Voter Project targeted 1.8 million environmentally focused nonvoters and claims to have made a substantial difference in some key races.
We encourage President- elect Joe Biden to embrace a price on carbon pollution that is supported by more than 3,500 economists including 28 Nobel Laureate economists. Janet Yellen, Biden’s pick for treasury secretary, has even said, “A carbon tax … the ‘ first best’ policy to address carbon emissions.”
In a speech this fall, Biden said, “Hurricanes don’t swerve to avoid red states or blue states. Wildfires don’t skip towns that voted a certain way. The impacts of climate change don’t pick and choose. It’s not a partisan phenomenon, and our response should be the same.”
Some Republicans in the Senate express similar opinions. In October, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, participated in a climate policy webinar with her climate-hawk colleague, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. She noted that bipartisanship gives a policy longevity, saying, “Let’s work in a way that is going to get the support that you need from both Republicans and Democrats.” Pricing carbon has appeal on both sides of the aisle as well as support from some major oil companies such as Shell and BP.
Ninety- seven percent of climate scientists affirm that fossil fuel emissions are warming the planet. Climate change is already hurting Americans. This year more than 5 million acres burned across Western states, displacing thousands of people and preventing outdoor exercise. Category 5 hurricane Iota was the 30th named storm in the 2020 hurricane season, breaking all-time records.
California already has had a price on carbon pollution since 2013 under our cap-and-trade system. Under cap and trade, large polluters have to purchase the right to emit greenhouse gasses. The money collected is spent on programs to reduce emissions, including the controversial high- speed rail project. We prefer imposing a fee nationwide at the point where fossil fuels first enter the economy through mining or importation and then rebating all of the money collected to taxpayers in equal dividend checks. In doing so, the government doesn’t pick winning or losing companies or technologies, and low income consumers come out ahead. American manufacturers are protected by a rebate of the pollution fee upon export.
Like cigarette taxes, a price on fossil fuel pollution will accelerate a transition toward healthier options, slashing our harmful emissions across many areas of our economy at once.
Carbon-fee legislation exists in Congress now. The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act, HR 763, has support from people and organizations across the political spectrum. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, is among 85 members of Congress who have co-sponsored this bill. The San Jose City Council and Silicon Valley Leadership Group support it in principle. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D- Calif., and Rep. Jimmy Panetta, D- Carmel Valley, have introduced similar legislation.
With the incoming president clearly committed to addressing climate change, and millions of Americans eager for solutions, Congress needs to pass this effective market-based solution.
Public demand for climate action is swelling. According to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, a majority of Americans are either “alarmed” or “concerned” about climate change.