State conservatives slam Green New Deal
Critics of a sweeping progressive program to confront global warming and social issues said Wednesday it would cost a typical Wisconsin family more than $40,000 per year and would cripple agriculture.
In a study released by the Wisconsin
Institute for Law & Liberty and other conservative groups, researchers said the Green New Deal proposed by Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., would restructure the U.S. economy by raising the costs of electricity, new vehicles, buildings and shipping. They also said it would result in higher food costs and a carbon tax on farmers.
“The Green New Deal would drive middle class families into poverty by imposing staggering annual costs of more than $40,000 per household,” said Will Flanders, research director for the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty.
The study’s figures are based on
estimates of additional electricity demand, the cost of electric vehicles, retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency, decreased crop yields as farmers switched to organic crops, and a carbon tax on livestock farmers.
“At its root, the Green New Deal is a radical blueprint to decarbonize the American economy. Carbon, whether contained in wood, coal, gas or oil, is a byproduct of burning fuel. Eliminating these energy sources would have massive ramifications for the economy,” the Competitive Enterprise Institute, based in Washington, D.C., said in the study.
The Green New Deal's backers say it does not call for a full phase-out of fossil fuels, but instead pushes for a transition that is rapid but “fair and just to all communities and workers.”
It is an umbrella covering a number of initiatives, such as calling for a dramatic increase in the generation of renewable fuels and a shift within 10 years to energy systems that are “net-zero” when it comes to greenhouse gases that are the primary contributor to climate change.
It also calls for higher education and job guarantees for all U.S. citizens and prescribes a broad social justice platform that includes free housing and medical coverage.
In Wisconsin, critics slammed the plan, saying it would harm farmers as well as raise household costs.
“With its goal of zero emissions and promotion of organic farming methods, farmers are likely to incur substantial new costs, which will be passed on to consumers,” Flanders said.
Among the 11 states analyzed, the study estimates the Green New Deal could cost an average household more than $75,000 in the first year of implementation and more than $40,000 each year afterward. The states are:
Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
The Green New Deal calls for the federal government to promote sustainable farming practices, training for clean-energy sector jobs, cleaner transportation systems such as high-speed rail, and spending on technology that reduces carbon pollution.
It could cost Wisconsin's dairy industry $2.5 billion, or roughly $2,000 per cow, to meet the environmental standards, according to the study.
“Some of this might be borne by consumers, but it is likely that consumers would seek milk alternatives as the price of milk shot up,” Flanders said.
Yet some farm groups, such as Madison-based Family Farm Defenders, say they're in favor of the Green New Deal for its potential to move the U.S. away from an industrial model of agriculture that's hurt small farms and the environment.
“Factory-farm operations increase greenhouse gas emissions,” said John Peck, executive director of Family Farm Defenders.
Farmers can adapt to changes aimed at protecting the environment and curbing climate change, said Mark Kastel, founder of Organic Eye, a La Fargebased group that monitors the organic farming industry.
“The reality is we have to create more resilient farming systems,” Kastel said. “Last year was one of the wettest years in history in Wisconsin and I was just amazed at the impact. It was one of the reasons that dairy farmers, already on the edge, went out of business.”
Consumers should be paying more for food, according to Kastel.
“The problem is we don't value food in this country. We should be producing it in an ecologically responsible manner, and we should do it in a way that adequately and justly compensates the people who are responsible for feeding us," he said.