HB 22-14: The Red-Green New Deal (Passed)

[thumb21]

Encke's amendment is adopted

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Anything else to say on this?

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

I have the following questions for the sponsor. I posed shorter versions of these questions to Blair earlier, but he had always intended on removing/seriously revising Section V anyway, so did not provide much of a response.

• How exactly are fossil fuels supposed to be 'phased out?' It seems that before we begin phasing out fossil fuels, the necessary renewable energy infrastructure needs to be in place, which means that the "publicly owned renewable energy companies" and the nationalized oil and gas companies will need to be operating at the same time, yes (not to mention that this renewable energy infrastructure could not be built without some level of fossil fuel extraction)? This raises questions about how the transfer of workers from fossil fuels to renewable energy, using the NPWA as a bridge, will work, as the renewable energy companies would have already employed workers before fossil fuel extraction ceases.
• Yankee asked this question in the other thread, but how will this affect products that are currently made using fossil fuels? (see: https://www.ranken-energy.com/index.php/products-made-from-petroleum/). Can all of these products be made using some alternative, or will we need to become entirely dependent on foreign countries to obtain these products?
• How many workers will be displaced by the process? During the so-called phase-out period, will workers that are no longer needed at the oil/gas plants be transitioned immediately to the NPWA? At the beginning of the phase-out, will there be enough workers to sustain NPWA projects? Will there be enough NPWA projects to cover all of the geographical areas affected by the shuttering of oil/gas plants throughout Atlasia?

To Thumb: You mentioned that you wanted to improve Section V in some way. Any ideas?

[thumb21]

To Thumb: You mentioned that you wanted to improve Section V in some way. Any ideas?

I think that we should reduce the cost, which to be fair may be lower now than when you made your original calculations, by scaling back the nationalisations or by finding new revenue.

[Elcaspar]

I have seen the questions. I will have a response out within the week.

[Elcaspar]

I will have to apologize for a delayed response to my fellow Representatives. The response will most likely be out later today.

[Elcaspar]

How exactly are fossil fuels supposed to be 'phased out?' It seems that before we begin phasing out fossil fuels, the necessary renewable energy infrastructure needs to be in place, which means that the "publicly owned renewable energy companies" and the nationalized oil and gas companies will need to be operating at the same time, yes (not to mention that this renewable energy infrastructure could not be built without some level of fossil fuel extraction)? This raises questions about how the transfer of workers from fossil fuels to renewable energy, using the NPWA as a bridge, will work, as the renewable energy companies would have already employed workers before fossil fuel extraction ceases.

Since the total phase-out of fossil-fuels is set for 2035, it seems likely that our renewable energy infrastructure will already be sufficiently developed by the time of said total phase-out. We have 15 years to gradually phase out our fossil-fuels after all, so that does indeed mean that our nationalized oil and gas companies are operating at same time during the 15 year phase-out period. It's true that we can't completely get around using fossil fuels to create our renewable energy infrastructure, but that's part of the reason that the process is a gradual one, so that we use gradually less fossil fuels as we build more of our renewable energy infrastructure.

Yankee asked this question in the other thread, but how will this affect products that are currently made using fossil fuels? (see: https://www.ranken-energy.com/index.php/products-made-from-petroleum/). Can all of these products be made using some alternative, or will we need to become entirely dependent on foreign countries to obtain these products?

During the phase-out period, we should also gradually phase-out petroleum-based products in favor of alternative materials where possible. As of right now there likely isn't an alternative for every petroleum-based product, but given time and effort it could certainly be possibility. Although just as Senator Pyro pointed out, this bill is specifically related to fossil fuel production and extraction rather than its use as a raw good. 

How many workers will be displaced by the process? During the so-called phase-out period, will workers that are no longer needed at the oil/gas plants be transitioned immediately to the NPWA? At the beginning of the phase-out, will there be enough workers to sustain NPWA projects? Will there be enough NPWA projects to cover all of the geographical areas affected by the shuttering of oil/gas plants throughout Atlasia?

Ideally there are no-one that will be displaced by the process, since fossil fuel workers will be transitioned as soon as possible to the NWPA where they will be granted a living wage job. Also since former fossil-fuel workers will be prioritized for the NWPA, it seems unlikely that anyone will be displaced . The NWPA will be sustained by other workers in beginning, as it doesn't exclusively take from the fossil fuel industry since it's a public works program, and especially since there is an opportunity  for the NWPA to be sustained by people who wish to work during COVID-19.

[thumb21]

This isn't an area of my expertise so I apologise for my lack of contribution on this bill during my time in congress. I think the main area that needs to be looked at is some sort of just transition plan to support workers who lose their job as a result. I hope that the next congress is able to finalise this bill.

[Elcaspar]

Bumping this bill for the new Congress to see. I will resume sponsorship of bill unless someone else wants to challenge that.

[Joseph Cao]

FWIW, based on the most recent amendment from Encke, a revision of his cost analysis from earlier in the debate lowers the total allocated for the energy fund in paragraph V.1 to $427.1352 billion.

Anyway, the points raised regarding Section V remain valid and are my main area of concern for this bill, which is otherwise commendable and has the right spirit. I'm glad to see that the more problematic portions of Section VI have been addressed.

[Mike Thick]

I motion for a final vote on this legislation.

[Rep Jessica]

I stand before you to argue against this bill as it interferes in the private sector in such ways that will hurt this nation and the public we're serving. Quite frankly this bill is utterly unacceptable to anyone that cares about the poor and the working man/woman having to live pay check to pay check as energy prices are going to shoot through the roof and the idea that we will force our private sector to phase out oil, gas and goal within 15 years is utterly insane and will cause unimaginable harm to our economy.  I plead that this insane left wing bill be voted down! I beg you for the future of our nation and our ability to compete on the global stage economically.

Instead we should open up the oil fields, build more nuclear plants and fund fusion research! All energy policy should be promoted by this government for lower energy cost for our citizens and for a more competitive economy!.

Kids will go without if we vote for such policy and that is not acceptable. The poor will pay the price!

[Joseph Cao]

Objection to the motion. A couple of things need to be noted and/or amended before we proceed further (which is partly on me, as I originally planned to introduce an amendment last month).

Firstly, I think a small modification is in order:

The Red-Green New Deal

SENATE BILL

To address climate change in Atlasia

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled,

Section I: Title

1. This Act may be cited as the "Red-Green New Deal" or "RGND".

Section II: Resolution

1. We Recognize:

  a. The seriousness and urgency associated with climate change must be met with swift action in order to ensure the continued welfare and prosperity of all Atlasians.

  b. Those at fault must be held accountable, and the industries polluting our environment must be eliminated.

  c. We must aim for a total phase-out of fossil fuels by 2035.

  d. We can spark a green revolution in Atlasia and become a focal point in a new age of industry and technology.

Section III: Extraction

1. Offshore drilling within 25 miles of the Atlasian coastline shall be prohibited from January 1st, 2024.

2. The placing of new oil pipeline, other than for the use of repair or renovation of existing lines, is hereby prohibited.

  a. Any update, repair, or alteration to existing pipeline must comply with existing regulation and be reviewed by appropriate local and federal agencies.

Section IV: Hydraulic Fracking

1. No new leases shall be granted by any federal agency for new hydraulic fracturing operations, new pipelines, new liquefied natural gas or oil export terminals, new natural gas storage, new ethane cracker plants, new natural gas power generation plants, or other infrastructure intended to extract, transport, or burn natural gas or oil.

2. A tax of 10% shall be applied on the profits of any firm which operates any existing lease for hydraulic fracturing operations from the 1st June 2020 January 2021.

 a. This tax shall increase to 15% from the 1st June 2021 January 2022.

 b. This tax shall increase to 20% on the 1st June 2022 January 2023.

 c. Beginning on January July 1, 2022, the practice of hydraulic fracturing for oil and natural gas is prohibited within 2,500 feet of a home, school, or other inhabited structure in Atlasia.

 d. Beginning on January 1, 2024 2025, the practice of hydraulic fracturing for oil and natural gas is prohibited on all onshore and offshore land in Atlasia.

Section V: Utility Ownership

1. The Department of Internal Affairs shall be instructed to create a Social Energy Fund.

  a. The Fund shall receive an amount equivalent to gaining public control over the top twenty five largest publicly traded energy companies headquartered in Atlasia.

    i. "Public Control" is defined as at least 51% of total shares.

  b. The Fund shall offer to voluntarily purchase up to 51% of the total shares in the companies described in IV.1.a.
 
    i. With each offer, the Department of Internal Affairs shall release a statement declaring its aim to compulsorily purchase the shares required to acquire a majority within sixteen months.

  c. The Fund shall be chartered to utilize its stake in the companies described in IV.1.a to achieve the following.

    i. Compliance with international de-carbonization objectives.
   
    ii. The transition to an energy sector led by publicly owned renewable energy companies.
 
    iii. The gradual phase-out of fossil fuel extraction.

Section VI: Public Works

1. The Department Internal Affairs shall be instructed to create a New Public Works Administration

  a. The NPWA shall develop, administrate, maintain and oversee public building projects.

  b. The NPWA shall be led by the ranking officer for the Department of Internal Affairs.

    i. Shall there be no ranking officer for the Department Internal Affairs be vacant, these duties shall fall to the President of Atlasia.

2. The ranking officer for the Department Internal Affairs may appoint a board of NPCs to assist in the development of NPWA projects.

3. NPWA projects shall include

    a. Construction and Engineering

    b. Renewable Energy Development and Energy Efficiency Retrofitting

    c. Coding, Server Farms and Technological Development

    d. Sustainable Agriculture

    e. Civil Corps
 

4. All NPWA projects shall provide workers with the following.

  a. Pay equivalent to 10% above a "living wage" determined by residency.

  b. Full membership in a labor union.

  c. Employment benefits delegated per project.

5. The NPWA shall operate with an annual budget of $100 billion.

Section VII: Effective Date

1. This act takes effect on June 1st, 2020 January 1st, 2021.

This is a simple amendment to account for the fact that we've blown past the original date of June 1, 2020 and to provide a sufficient window for companies to comply with the legislation.

I do have another amendment coming up but I'll let the House consider this one first. For now, I just want to note the consideration I raised last month regarding Section V, which I'd like to hear the House's thoughts on as well:

Based on the most recent amendment from Encke, a revision of his cost analysis from earlier in the debate lowers the total allocated for the energy fund in paragraph V.1 to $427.1352 billion.

Finally, my belated thanks to the Speaker for getting to our concerns on the phase-out process for fossil fuels. Much appreciated.

[Mike Thick]

Okay, if nobody objects to the amendment within 24 hours of its posting, we’ll consider it adopted. I appreciate the Congressman’s comments, and he’s welcome to introduce an additional amendment.

That said, this has been on the floor long enough — in accordance with the rules, I’m moving to a cloture vote. If you guys propose amendments before the end of the cloture vote that are germane to the intent of the bill (i.e. formally codifying the $427 billion figure) we can consider them before we go to a final vote.

A vote on ending debate is now open. Representatives will have 72 hours to vote, or 24 hours after the bill attains majority support or opposition. Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.

Aye.

[Boobs]

Nay

[Boobs]

Changing my vote to Aye

[P. Clodius Pulcher did nothing wrong]

Aye

[SevenEleven]

Aye

Also, I'm formally proposing the amendment in Rep. Cao's above post for consideration before a final vote.

[Mike Thick]

Aye

Also, I'm formally proposing the amendment in Rep. Cao's above post for consideration before a final vote.

The one changing the dates? I was already considering that to have been proposed.

[Gracile]

Aye

[SevenEleven]

Aye

Also, I'm formally proposing the amendment in Rep. Cao's above post for consideration before a final vote.

The one changing the dates? I was already considering that to have been proposed.

Ok, I just wanted to make sure as it's a fairly important adjustment.

[Mike Thick]

Aye

Also, I'm formally proposing the amendment in Rep. Cao's above post for consideration before a final vote.

The one changing the dates? I was already considering that to have been proposed.

Ok, I just wanted to make sure as it's a fairly important adjustment.

No prob.

The motion has enough votes to pass. 24 hours to vote or change your votes.

[Joseph Cao]

Abstaining on the motion to end debate.

[Mike Thick]

Cloture has been invoked, and debate has ended. Since Cao hasn't proposed any additional amendments, and nobody objected to his previous amendment, I don't think there's any further business to handle here.

It is now in order for a final vote on this bill. Members will have 72 hours to vote, or 24 hours from whenever the bill attains majority support or opposition. Please vote aye, nay, or abstain.

[SevenEleven]

Aye