Take a good look at the language included in a “clean energy” resolution that came up for consideration during a recent gathering of free-market activists and compare it to a proposal known as the “Green Real Deal.”
Guess what: They are largely the same.
The “Green Real Deal” should not be confused with the Green New Deal. Both take a jaundiced view toward fossil fuel use, and both proceed under the assumption that carbon dioxide emissions should be curbed to avert catastrophic climate change.
Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida, introduced the “Green Real Deal” in the form of House Resolution 288 this spring as an alternative to the Green New Deal championed by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, the chief sponsor of House Resolution 109, and by Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, who is sponsoring Senate Resolution 59. Both versions of the Green New Deal call for a “10-year national mobilization effort” to completely end the use of fossil fuels in the United States and transition the nation’s economy to renewable energy sources.
The clean energy resolution, which was the subject of debate during the American Legislative Exchange Council’s August meeting in Austin, Texas, opens with language critical of the Green New Deal, but it quickly pivots to embrace policies promoting wind and solar energy. That’s a problem from a free-market perspective because it is the taxpayers who are footing the bill for government mandates underpinning wind and solar projects that political figures describe as “clean energy.” ALEC’s membership includes state lawmakers and private sector leaders devoted to the principles of constitutional limited government. ALEC’s Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force decided to table the resolution rather than allow it to go forward because key figures on the task force decided it was not consistent with ALEC principles, according to sources privy to the discussions.
At least two-thirds of the wording in the resolution, including all of the operative “be it resolved” clauses, appear to be copy-pasted from Gaetz’s “Green Real Deal.” ALEC member organizations in attendance that supported the resolution included Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, the Conservative Energy Network, the Christian Coalition, Conservative Texans for Energy Innovation, the Wisconsin Conservative Energy Forum, EDP Renewables, and ClearPath Foundation, to name a few. As I previously reported, a number of groups pushing green energy initiatives market themselves as conservative or libertarian but receive their funding from left-of-center sources.
There appears to be a deliberate strategy at work here on the part of liberal green activists to burrow into ALEC under the guise of sly marketing campaigns.
“I think that the enviro groups thought that they could slap a few anti Green New Deal phrases into a resolution that was otherwise largely contrary to ALEC principles and get legislators to wave it through,” one source said on background.
In many respects, wind and solar initiatives are a lose-lose for American taxpayers and consumers. They cannot be scheduled to meet growing energy needs since their sources are intermittent and open to frequent disruption. Therefore, they require substantial backup from conventional fossil fuel sources. The sun doesn’t always shine, and the wind doesn’t always blow. Wind and solar also come with their own environmental baggage. Benjamin Zycher, a scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, makes the point that “clean power” is often not so clean. They involve “heavy metal pollution, flicker effects, solar panel waste, wildlife destruction,” and they require “massive land use,” Zycher says.
So, if the resolution translates into bigger, more intrusive government while also subtracting from environmental quality, why is it finding expression with a group like ALEC?
“I think that these cut-out groups are being paid to come to ALEC to undermine the consensus position of the legislators in favor of free markets in the energy space,” another ALEC task force member said on background. “You have to have a certain contempt for the audience to think something this transparent would pass just because it also had a few anti Green New Deal Clauses.”
The Institute for Energy Research, a non-profit group in Washington, D.C., that favors free market policies in the energy sector, has put together a database called “Big Green Inc.” that tracks the money flowing from foundations that have provided funding to some of the groups supporting the “clean energy” resolution at ALEC.
“It’s unfortunate to see these proposals come to light,” Thomas Pyle, IER’s president, said in an interview. “I can appreciate the notion that conservatives, or Republicans, may want to offer something in response to the short-sidedness behind the Green New Deal, but the counter to communism isn’t communism-lite, as Rep. Gaetz has proposed. The U.S. is the number one oil and gas producer in the world. Through market forces and innovation we have flipped the script globally and we’re now in the energy driver’s seat. Both the Green New Deal and the ‘Green Real Deal’ would essentially throw that all away. Conservatives should be responding to the Green New Deal — or any government-run energy regime — with free-market solutions. It’s been proven time and time again, when the government intervenes in markets, Americans lose.”
Kevin Mooney (@KevinMooneyDC) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner‘s Beltway Confidential blog. He is an investigative reporter in Washington, D.C., who writes for several national publications.
