The Green New Deal

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today to join again my colleagues to speak of the need for bipartisan action to address climate warming.

Throughout the past year, we have received warning after warning about the warming and about the devastating consequences of climate change that are coming much sooner than some people actually expected.

I remember when I first got to the Senate. I was part of the Environment Committee, and we had military leaders come to speak. We had scientists, and they basically predicted everything that we have seen coming, from the wildfires in the West to the rising ocean levels, to weird weather events like more tornadoes, to the type of flooding that we are seeing in the Midwest as we speak and the type of flooding we have seen in Florida as a result of hurricanes.

They also talked about the economic consequences of this. I think it is really important that people don't see this as environment versus economics. If we do nothing, the economics are bad. If we do nothing, we are going to continue to see homeowners' insurance increase, like we have nationwide--a 50-percent increase in the last 10 years.

If we do something and we do it right and we do it smartly, we are going to see a bunch of new jobs in the field of green energy. We are going to see more solar. We are going to see more wind. We are going to see a whole new industry of an electric grid and things that we need to do to bring down greenhouse gases and be a leader once again in energy for the world.

Last October, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a special report explaining the potential impact of climate change if the Earth warms 1.5 degrees Celsius above historic global temperature levels dating back to before the Industrial Revolution started. That report predicted that in just over 20 years, we could see even more of what we have seen this last year: persistent drought, food shortages, worsening wildfires, and increased flooding-- damage that could cost an estimated $54 trillion.

Then, in November, the ``Fourth National Climate Assessment'' issued a special report that concluded that without significant global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, climate change will threaten the health and safety of people, will slow economic growth, will damage our Nation's infrastructure, which we are seeing right now in the Midwest, and will impede the production of energy and food.

Finally, in January of this year, the U.S. Department of Defense released a report on the effects of a changing climate to U.S. military installations and their operational viability. All of these experts-- yes, scientists, and, yes, military leaders--have made it clear that inaction is not an option for our economy, for our environment, for our country, or for our world.

Military and security experts have repeatedly reminded us that climate change is a threat to our national security. Look at the examples of refugees coming up from Africa--people who used to be subsistence farmers who no longer can make their livings. They used to eek by, which was not easy, but now they are moving up; they are moving to Europe. That is just one example of what we are seeing.

I am from a State of refugees. Our refugees are a major part of our economy, but we know we want to have a sensible refugee policy and that we can't have sudden droves of people moving up because of environmental catastrophes that are going on in their countries. Yet we are going to see more and more and more of that. At some point, we have to realize, you know what, we want thriving economies in Africa; we want thriving economies throughout the world; and climate change is going to be an impediment to that.

If you want to close your eyes to the rest of the world and pretend it is not happening, it is going to come knocking at your door. It is what is going to keep happening if we don't do something about climate change. There will be more severe weather--heat waves that could reduce our water supply, extreme rainfall that could damage critical infrastructure, a decrease in agricultural productivity that could threaten, in my State alone, a $20 billion ag industry, which ranks fifth in the Nation. We cannot close our eyes to climate change because it is happening right now around us.

That is why it is all the more disappointing that the Senate has failed to seriously consider legislation that would address climate change. I have been here for these close calls. When I first came to the Senate, we were so close to getting a renewable electricity standard put in place nationwide. I had a bill that would have done that. It would have been combined with the renewable fuel standard, and I think it would have been a good way to have brought people in from both parties, from both sides of the aisle, and from all parts of the country. I remember standing in the back of this Chamber with Senator Cantwell, bemoaning the fact that we were just one vote short of getting it done. That was over a decade ago.

Meanwhile, yes, States are taking action. With our having a Republican Governor at the time, Tim Pawlenty, my State was able to get a renewable electricity standard put in place--something like 20 to 25 percent by 2025--and we are making that. We wouldn't have made it if we had not set a goal, which, at that time, seemed bold, and we did it on a bipartisan basis--with Democrats, Republicans, and the legislature. We combined it politically with a renewable fuel standard so it would get some of our farmers and other people on board. We had two provisions in there--a strong renewable electricity standard and a strong renewable fuel standard, with a Republican Governor leading the way. Why? We could see ahead. We could see the effect climate change would have on our outdoor economy. We could see the effect it would have on hunting and fishing and recreation in our State.

Here is what happened. We barely missed doing something on the renewable electricity standard. Then President Obama got elected, and we were in the middle of a downturn. I had actually hoped we would have moved on renewable electricity, but the decision was made to go with cap and trade. I supported cap and trade. In the end, despite its passing in the House, we couldn't get the votes in the Senate, in part, because we were in the middle of a downturn.

Since then, we have done a few things on energy efficiency, which have been good, that Secretary Chu called the low-hanging fruit. We have done some things in the farm bill with conservation, with the sodsaver provision that I have with Senator Thune, but we haven't done anything that significantly makes a difference.

Instead, the administration has taken us out of the international climate change agreement, which means we are the only country in the world that isn't in it. When the President first made his announcement, Syria and Nicaragua were not in it. Now they are. This is not what leadership is when we are the only country that is not part of this agreement. No, that is not what leadership is, and it certainly impedes our doing business around the world when it comes to green energy.

Other countries can go in there and ask: Why are you going to do business with this country? It is the only one that hasn't signed on to the international climate change agreement? That happens. I have heard from businesspeople. That happens. That is one thing that happens.

When it came to greenhouse gases, the standards we had in place at the EPA were a compromise that had been worked on over years. It is now on the cutting room floor because this administration went backward.

The gas mileage standard is something else we could do. Again, we went backward. Instead of working on these things--coming up with more comprehensive legislation--unfortunately, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle decided, yesterday, to play politics by bringing up the Green New Deal resolution with the explicit intention of trying to create a divide by voting it down.

Do you know what? The resolution, as I have said, is aspirational. It sets out some audacious goals. We know we can't meet everything that is in that resolution in 10 years. Yet what has it done that I think is so good? It has reignited the debate on how the United States can lead the way in addressing global climate change while building a clean energy future that benefits American businesses, factories, and workers.

We are a country that sets audacious goals. We put a man on the Moon, right? We won World War II. We are a country that sets audacious goals. Sometimes it takes us longer to meet them, which is OK. If we see a problem, we don't just put our heads down. We look ahead; we look at each other; and we figure out how we are going to meet the challenge. That is what we have to do with climate change.

At the same time that our Republican colleagues brought up the Green New Deal resolution for a vote, they declined to consider the resolution that was offered by Senator Carper that simply says climate change is real, that human activity during the last century has been the dominant cause of the climate crisis, and that the United States and Congress should take immediate action to address the challenges of climate change.

The challenges we face are too great to waste time on show votes and political stunts. For years, we have heard of the things we can do to make a difference. There is not one approach; it is an ``all of the above'' approach. We know--and I have seen the models--what we can do to start bringing the temperature down to an international goal, by the way, of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. That is a lot, but our wanting to stay under that amount is actually a realistic goal right now.

Instead of spending time debating these kinds of show resolutions, we should be taking real action to combat climate change. We need a comprehensive approach that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote energy-efficient technologies and homegrown energy resources. That is what we should do. When Senator McConnell brought up what was an aspirational resolution to bring people together, he did it as a show to divide people. That is not what we want to do here. We have people from all over the country who have some different views on this, and we should be coming together to figure out solutions. As I noted, I believe we must reinstate the Clean Power Plan rules and the gas mileage standards that the administration has reversed, which has rolled back the progress we have made.

I also want to talk today about my home State's work on these issues.

I am proud Minnesota has taken a proactive and innovative approach to energy use and sustainability, which is critical to addressing carbon emissions and climate change. As I noted, that 25-percent electricity standard would be met and is going to be met by 2025. This bipartisan bill was signed into law by Governor Pawlenty in 2007, and it passed the House back then.

By the way, that was 2007, right? Since then, everything we have learned has reinforced what we know, which is that climate change is happening. Back in 2007, we had not seen this big push against doing something about it. We had not seen all of the dark money that went in to take care of not doing something about it and to back up this inertia we are seeing. Yet, somehow, back in 2007, in my State, I guess we got it through--we got around some of this--because that legislation that was signed by a Republican Governor received overwhelmingly bipartisan support. It passed the Minnesota House by a vote of 123 to 10 and passed the Minnesota Senate by 63 to 3.

Earlier this month, our new Governor, Governor Walz, announced a proposal that would build on that earlier work by setting a goal of generating 100 percent of the State's energy from clean sources by 2050. We have also seen other Governors doing this across the country. I think that is great. Justice Brandeis once said that the States are laboratories of democracy, which is a good thing. We can't just sit there and expect States, on an individual basis, to change the national dialogue. Some of these things have to be done by us in this Chamber in Washington, DC.

Once we set those goals, which started with the Republican Governor of Minnesota and then moved on to two Democratic Governors, what we saw was Xcel Energy--Minnesota's largest utility--as being the earliest supporter of the last administration's Clean Power Plan. This is an electric utility--the biggest one in our State--that recently announced plans to deliver 100-percent carbon-free electricity to its customers by 2050. As part of that pledge, it plans to reduce carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2030 in the eight States it serves. It is an electric company--a power utility--that has realized this is in its best long- term interest and that it is certainly in the best long-term interest of its customers.

If energy utilities like Xcel understand the need to reduce our use of fossil fuels and to embrace setting ambitious goals that will eventually get us to 100-percent clean renewable energy, then so should we and so should the administration.

We know energy innovation can't really take root--not in any kind of serious way--without there being certainty, stability, and a clear path forward. Yes, some of that can happen in the States, and that is exciting. It can happen in our businesses and in businesses in Minnesota, like Cargill--the biggest private company in the country-- that looks at the world and sees what is going to happen to its investors and its employees if we don't do something about climate change. It has joined in an effort with major businesses to take this on. So, yes, States are doing things, and Governors are doing things.

Yes, electric utilities are doing things. Some of our small electric utilities in Minnesota have actually started creating incentives for solar panels. One of the most innovative ones will give its customers-- this is a very small town in a small county--large water heaters that cost about $1,000 if, in exchange, they will get solar panels.

Senator Hoeven and I worked on a bill to make sure people in this Chamber understood that these large water heaters were really helpful in the basements of farmhouses and that they were actually more energy efficient. Then this utility--a little electric co-op--took a step forward and actually offered a free water heater in exchange for buying a long-term interest in a solar panel. It is not as easy when you are a small electric co-op. I have a ton of them in my State, and I have worked with them extensively, but they, too, are starting to see the future and are starting to do their part.

In my State, we have big businesses like Cargill, big electric utilities like Xcel, and little electric co-ops. We have our Governors. We have businesses that are not in the electric business but that see what is happening to their customers around the world. We have universities, nonprofits, churches, synagogues, and mosques that want to retrofit and make their places of worship more energy efficient, which is another bill I have with Senator Hoeven. When all of this is going on, how can we just sit here and do nothing and instead have negative show votes for no reason at all? We are going to keep talking about this and not let it go because what we need is action.

We need policies that encourage reduction in greenhouse gasses. We must leave our children with a world that is as good as the one we got.

There is an old Ojibwe saying--we have a lot of proud Indian Tribes in Minnesota--that says: You make decisions not for now but for seven generations from now.

You know what. That is our duty. But guess what. With climate change, it is no longer just seven generations now; it is for the pages who are sitting right here, because this is happening right now. The predictions are dire.

I was in Florida just a few weeks ago, and they predict that in a decade, 1 out of 10 of their homes is going to be flooded in their State--1 out of 10 of their homes.

You see what is happening in Norfolk, VA. You look at these pages and you think: This is not just seven generations from now; this is 7 years from now or 70 years from now. That is what we are dealing with. It is upon us. So it is our duty, our constitutional duty as elected representatives, to do our job. It is our moral duty to do the right thing for this country. So let's get to work and get this done.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source