FT 16.02 - Green Futures Act (DEBATING)

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Let me begin by stating this is a truly impressive bill, both for its scope and ambition. Were it to be brought to a vote today, I would not hesitate to vote for passage. There are a few points on which I believe this legislation could be further improved, which I will enumerate briefly.

(a) The tariffs proposed by §III, while wise and prudent, are also likely unconstitutional. I would suggest we amend the relevant subsection to instead petition Congress to impose these restrictions on the importation of fossil fuels.
(b) While I do not discount the value of partnering with the private sector in order to transition to green energy sources as quickly as possible, I would prefer such to be in fact a partnership rather than an effective re-privitization of the energy sector via the current §V. I don't mind contracting out to private companies to build green infrastructure &c., but I would prefer that the completed product belong to the people of Frémont; this is ultimately the only way we can ensure that our energy policy reflects the interests of consumers and indeed the planet rather than those of corporations. As I believe the speaker stated privately that this section would not re-privatize energy, I would be interested to hear how he imagines this to be true when there are clear references to private power in the text of the bill. (Perhaps I am missing something obvious.)
(c) While I don't disagree with the provisions substantially, realistically we have to assume that few will remember the specific provisions of this bill five years from now, so any clause mandating action by this government so far into the future will almost certainly be forgotten.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Well, the dates are hard to enforce, but realistically an energy bill would have them, so while it's probably gonna get forgotten it's important symbolically. If that makes sense :/

I mean, realistically a parliament representing half the country would have more than five members and would serve longer than three months at a time. I think practicality is more important that realism in this case.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Well, the dates are hard to enforce, but realistically an energy bill would have them, so while it's probably gonna get forgotten it's important symbolically. If that makes sense :/

I mean, realistically a parliament representing half the country would have more than five members and would serve longer than three months at a time. I think practicality is more important that realism in this case.

Perhaps. I don't think that every single date in the bill is unneeded, though (many were inspired by Lincoln's combined legislation on the issue), so could you specify which clauses are in violation? I suspect II.iii and V.viii are what you're referring to, though I may be missing some others.

The concluding sentences of §II(iii) is the only one I have a problem with.

After 5 years, an independent committee appointed by the Department of Energy will recommend if the moratorium should be lifted, or should become permanent. A two-thirds majority in this body will be required to lift the moratorium.

Otherwise, I agree that the timeline proposed by this bill serves a useful purpose.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Well, the dates are hard to enforce, but realistically an energy bill would have them, so while it's probably gonna get forgotten it's important symbolically. If that makes sense :/

I mean, realistically a parliament representing half the country would have more than five members and would serve longer than three months at a time. I think practicality is more important that realism in this case.

Perhaps. I don't think that every single date in the bill is unneeded, though (many were inspired by Lincoln's combined legislation on the issue), so could you specify which clauses are in violation? I suspect II.iii and V.viii are what you're referring to, though I may be missing some others.

The concluding sentences of §II(iii) is the only one I have a problem with.

After 5 years, an independent committee appointed by the Department of Energy will recommend if the moratorium should be lifted, or should become permanent. A two-thirds majority in this body will be required to lift the moratorium.

Otherwise, I agree that the timeline proposed by this bill serves a useful purpose.

I don't think that's a problem. This body will only need to act if the independent (and I should mention NPC) committee reports that the moratorium on fracking needs to be lifted (to lift the fracking ban).

It's not clear to me from the text whether the moratorium will "become permanent" in lieu of any action by this house, or whether it simply expires at the end of five years. If the former, why do we need this language at all? That's how all laws work.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Good catch, guys. Correct me if I’m wrong, but couldn’t Parliament just take the part of the statute raising the threshold to 2/3 and repeal it by majority vote?

Indeed. Any statutory limit which aims to place restrictions on the ability of a future sitting of parliament to pass legislation by a majority vote is functionally unconstitutional.

As it seems to be in line with the intent of the sponsor, I would submit an amendment to §II(iii).

iii. A 5-year moratorium on fracking, beginning upon the passage of this bill, will be implemented in the Commonwealth of Fremont. After 5 years, an independent committee appointed by the Department of Energy will recommend if the moratorium should be lifted, or should become permanent. A two-thirds majority in this body will be required to lift the moratorium.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Nothing here. Good to move to a vote if you guys are.

Likewise.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Aye!

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

AN ACT

to combat climate change through energy investment and construction

Section I (Title)

i. The title of this Act shall be the “Green Futures Act”.

Section II (Declaration of Intents)

i. The Commonwealth of Fremont hereby recognizes the deleterious threat posed by the phenomenon of climate change, and pledges to become carbon-neutral by the year 2050.

Section III (Phasing Out Fossil Fuels)

i. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall immediately cease providing subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.
ii. All offshore drilling within the Commonwealth of Fremont shall be banned. In addition, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge shall immediately cease upon passage of this bill.
iii. A moratorium on fracking, beginning upon the passage of this bill, will be implemented in the Commonwealth of Fremont. After 5 years, an independent committee appointed by the Department of Energy will recommend if the moratorium should be lifted, or should become permanent.
iv. The phasing out of petroleum drilling within the Commonwealth of Fremont shall occur gradually by December 31, 2028, and the phasing out of coal mining within the Commonwealth of Fremont shall occur gradually by December 31, 2025. After the specified dates, these procedures shall be banned.
v. Any company that ceases petroleum drilling by December 31, 2024 or coal mining by December 31, 2022 shall receive a 2% tax credit for the next fiscal year. Any company that completely ceases either operation by December 31, 2021 shall receive a 5% tax credit for Fiscal Year 2022.
vi. Production of ‘nitrous oxide’ engines within the Commonwealth of Fremont shall be immediately banned.
vii. Beginning on January 1, 2030, a 5% tax on all fossil fuel products shall be introduced. This tax will be increased to 10% on January 1, 2040, then to 20% on January 1, 2045. All proceeds from this tax shall be used to fund renewable energy subsidies construction.
viii. A Fremont Commission on Emissions Caps shall be appointed immediately following the passage of this bill, and will be responsible for setting caps for carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions, effective January 1, 2025. The cap shall be decreased by 4% every year.
ix. Any company exceeding the emissions cap will be charged an additional 1% in corporate tax for every percent that they are over the limit.
x. Any company in violation of a clause in this Section (excluding clauses viii-ix) will be fined no less than $25 million. Any company that violates a clause more than once, or is in violation of multiple clauses, will be fined no less than $35 million or 10% of their profits, per violation, from the fiscal year the violation occurred, whichever sum is greater.
xi. Corporations who reduce their carbon emissions by 20% from their 2020 levels by 2025, 50% by 2035, and/or 80% by 2045, shall receive a 3% tax credit for the two following fiscal years.

Section IV (Solar Loans Project)

i. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall install solar panels on all public buildings by 2025, where feasible.
ii. The Commonwealth of Fremont will offer zero-interest loans to individual households, apartments, and legally-recognized small businesses to cover the cost of solar panel installation where feasible, with priority being given to residents of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Atlasian Samoa, Hawai’i, California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado, or those residing in regions with more average sunny days per annum.
iii. These loans will be paid back through the withholding of solar power reimbursement in monthly energy bills. The loan will be required to have been paid back in full 20 years after the loan was issued.
iv. All households that are legally considered below the poverty line, and have a yearly income of below $43,000, will only be required to pay back 80% of the loan.
v. Landlords and employers are forbidden from increasing rent for tenants or decreasing pay for employees due to financial considerations related to Fremont solar loans. Any landlords or employers in violation will be required to reimburse their tenants and/or employees, and will be additionally fined no less than $20,000.
vi. Individual citizens, landlords and small businesses will be eligible for loans once every 15 years.

Section V (Subsidies and Nuclear Power)

i. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall provide $40 million in additional funding to the solar power industry per year for the next 10 years, after which point the Parliament may decide to increase the funding, decrease it, or eliminate it.
ii. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall provide $50 million in additional funding to the wind power industry per year for the next 10 years, after which point the Parliament may decide to increase the funding, decrease it, or eliminate it.
iii. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall provide $35 million in additional funding to the hydroelectric industry per year for the next 10 years, after which point the Parliament may decide to increase the funding, decrease it, or eliminate it.
iv. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall provide $25 million in additional funding to miscellaneous renewable energy industries (including, but not limited to: geothermal power, tidal power, and biomass) per year for the next 10 years, after which point the Parliament may decide to increase the funding, decrease it, or eliminate it.
v. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall provide $200 million in yearly additional funding to fund cutting-edge research collaborations between the Fremont Department of Energy, universities, and private contractors, with the goal of both making existing green technology cheaper and creating new, affordable green technology. Targets of research shall include, but will not be limited to:
a. creating emission-free air conditioning and refrigeration solutions,
b. decarbonizing the agriculture industry,
c. creating more effective batteries and means of energy storage,
d. inventing carbon-capture methods to either store carbon in the ground or for use in new products,
e. creating new technology to make buildings net-zero emissions
f. decarbonizing goods production, and
g. reducing the cost of clean-energy motor vehicles.
vi. The Commonwealth of Fremont shall offer Clean Vehicle Rebates of up to $10,000, depending on engine size.
vii. These funding allocations shall be effective upon the passage of the next Budget.
viii. A Fremont Commission on Nuclear Power shall be appointed immediately following the passage of this bill. The Commission will evaluate the feasibility of widespread nuclear construction in Fremont, and will determine the level of risk for contamination and potential gains in carbon-free energy output. The Commission will present a report to Parliament, detailing its findings, by January 1, 2025 at the latest.

Section VI (Renewable Energy Construction)

i. The Fremont Department of Energy shall investigate the possibility of upgrading current green energy installations, initiating green energy construction on federally-owned land, and converting existing energy plants to renewable energy, considering the following factors to determine the viability of proposed projects;
a. estimated reduction in carbon emissions
b. proximity to population centers
c. cost, and
d. environmental impact
ii. The Fremont Department of Energy will contract approved construction projects to private construction corporations, with set budget, quality standards and timeline. If the contracted builders exceed their budget by more than 10%, they will pay a fine equivalent to 115% of the amount by which they have exceeded their budget. If the contracted builders fail to meet quality standards or their timeline, as defined by the Department of Energy, they will be fined no less than 10% of their monetary compensation, and may be blacklisted from receiving federal building contracts depending on the severity of the violation.