Steve Frey
Are you disgusted by ineffective legislators? There is a definite trend of a lack of action, and it just keeps getting worse. Let’s take a closer look.
First, how’s the traffic on I-81? After state legislature discussions about accidents, the need for changes in road design, and regular backups miles long, nothing was decided except to create a fund to gather funds. When the decision had to be made whether to create tolls, gas taxes, state taxes or something else, the legislature abandoned the people of Western Virginia. No one wants to tackle an issue that might involve raising taxes, so the accidents and parking lot on I-81 will continue and the cost of improvements will only increase.
How about the plans for school renovations needed statewide. State Senator Bill Stanley came up with a solution based on an internet commerce tax, but again, nothing was approved, so those dilapidated schools around the state will continue to have leaky roofs, one outlet per classroom for a technology-oriented future, and general hazards that put students and staff at risk. Oh, and yes, the eventual cost will only continue to rise.
You can think of other NRV initiatives which have also been “kicked down the road” to avoid taxes but then rise in price later.
Which brings us to the latest example of legislative inertia. If it were presented in theaters, it would be called “The Attack of the Green New Deal.”
Well, before reading on, you should see for yourself the provocative resolution that conservative members of Congress and television personalities are melting down about, so here it is:
https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hres109/BILLS-116hres109ih.pdf
Yes, this is an “aspirational” set of goals, as Senator (and presidential candidate) Amy Klobuchar called it. Keep an eye on Klobuchar, by the way. She is an excellent senator with a record of accomplishments and a knack for working well across the aisle.
First, you have to believe there is a problem with the world’s climate, and even many conservative legislators now think that “the data indicates a changing climate due in part to human activities,” as one recently put it.
Most conservatives in the House disagree on the extent of the concern and will not support the New Green Deal, and even though it may pass there, it won’t in the Republican-led Senate.
Sure, conservatives will say it costs too much, but they identify other problems, including the fact that “the Green New Deal creates high-quality union jobs; guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States; ensuring that public lands, waters, and oceans are protected and that eminent domain is not abused; providing all people of the United States with—(i) high-quality health care (ii) affordable, safe, and adequate housing (iii) economic security.”
Yes, the Democrats included in this non-binding resolution (a blueprint that would require additional legislation and funding to create action) all of the social programs they support philosophically, connecting them to climate change, but it’s anathema to Republican tenets.
The Republicans are going to attack it because of the potential cost, the old socialism bit, and phantom issues to make it into a joke. For example, they are telling people the Democrats want to get rid of cows and hamburger. This, of course, isn’t true, but here is what the resolution does say: “…working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible, including—(i) by supporting family farming; (ii) by investing in sustainable farming and land use practices that increase soil health; and (iii) by building a more sustainable food system that ensures universal access to healthy food.”
Some Republicans are saying the Democrats want to eliminate airplanes. The plan does not mention planes but only developing high-speed rail systems that would limit pollution. A poorly worded FAQ paper (that was quickly taken down), however, said the plan would “build out highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary, create affordable public transit available to all…” Again, this was poorly worded and obviously didn’t mean all air travel would end (no, people would still fly to Hawaii and elsewhere, but efficient, high-speed rail would reduce the need for many flights—think fewer chemtrails in the sky).
Other Republicans will refer to the idea of rebuilding structures which includes “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States and building new buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency, water efficiency…” No, buildings would not be destroyed but made more energy efficient (perhaps through incentives such as the current tax credits for solar power), along with requirements for new construction.
The bottom line: Because these goals have an all-encompassing expanse, the Republicans will dismiss them out of hand.
Most conservative leaders understand there are climate issues, and the horrific tornados, hurricanes, forest fires, drought, heat waves, rising tides and winter storms—some the worst in history—will continue and escalate. Human-made, carbon-based pollution can be reduced, but instead of study, debate, and action, many legislators will mock and dismiss, and just like I-81, school building renovations, and so many other pressing issues, nothing will be done.
America can spend funds to mitigate future disasters or spend increasing amounts in aid after an accelerating number of natural calamities. It’s a choice.
Legislators, do your job.
Steve Frey is a writer and CEO of Ascendant Educational Services based in Radford.
