Bledsoe for USA Today, “Democrats must embrace shale gas boom to win elections and climate battle”

Democrats don’t have enough power to shape climate change policy. They can win the midterm elections if they embrace the shale oil and gas boom and their role in it.

Millions of Americans are rightly urging immediate, serious action to address climate change on this Earth Day weekend. Democratic candidates should carry a winning version of this message right into the midterm elections: They must denounce the climate nihilism of the Trump administration, and highlight the stunning clean energy revolution Democratic policies have done much to create.

But these candidates should be smart about how they respond to climate change provocations from President Trump, Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt and others. In the swing states and districts they need to win back Congress, Democrats must also vocally support the shale natural gas boom that has been overwhelmingly good for American consumers, workers and the climate.

When voters are presented with an agenda that emphasizes a transitional role for domestic gas and oil along with renewable energy as part of climate protection, they will support Democrats over Trump’s climate denial and coal-dust memories.

Continue reading at USA Today.

Goldberg for The Hill, “Climate change lawsuits are ineffective political stunts”

Environmental activists are once again greeting a Republican administration’s resistance to setting carbon dioxide emission limits with lawsuits. In January, Mayor DeBlasio in New York City followed seven California cities that filed lawsuits over climate change last summer.

These lawsuits, though, miss the point and their target. They are not suing the Trump administration. They seek to circumvent the Trump administration by threatening massive liability against American businesses if they do not reduce their individual emissions.

Progressives should not reflexively cheer these lawsuits. For one thing, people on both sides of the aisle agree that these lawsuits have no foundation in the law and will not succeed. They are solely political stunts.

Continue reading at The Hill.

#TBT: Examining U.S.-China Relations in Energy Policy

This week, PPI Strategic Adviser Paul Bledsoe published a piece for The Hill exploring the dynamic between the United States and China when it comes to solar energy. According to Bledsoe, an examination of history suggests that “an element of global cooperation on energy technology among economic competitors may be necessary to address the existential threat of climate change.” In the context of this new piece, some may want to revisit another article for Politico about energy initiatives involving China and the United States that Bledsoe wrote last year.

In the piece from last April, “How Trump can help save coal—with China’s help,” Bledsoe argues that China could play an important role in complementing American efforts to develop clean coal technology. In supporting such a partnership, the Trump administration could bring back some coal jobs in the United States while helping to combat climate change in the long run. Although some would probably claim that the U.S. does not need help in this area, Bledsoe argues otherwise. Because low American natural gas prices limit investment, states regulate slowly, and carbon dioxide storage is not fully developed in the U.S., China could prove a helpful collaborator. Given this potential value, Bledsoe suggests that U.S. State and Energy Departments work with the Chinese “to greatly accelerate the timetables under which commercially viable CCS technology can be widely deployed in both countries.”

Just this month, Trump signed legislation that included larger tax cuts for capturing and storing carbon, potentially bringing down costs and giving the technology commercial value. Additionally, the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center remains active today. Together, these two PPI pieces from Paul Bledsoe highlight the potential value of cooperation between the United States and China on energy issues, acknowledging that this relationship must be complex in order to meaningfully fight climate change. By taking a globalized approach in situations such as these, the United States is likely to find more effective options for combatting energy challenges.

Bledsoe for The Hill, “Solar case shows climate protection requires globalized economy”

Responses to President Trump’s imposition of tariffs on Chinese solar panels fall into two general camps.

One holds that Chinese solar manufacturing subsidies are so egregious as to require U.S. tariffs to deter additional subsidies by Beijing. Others believe the action is really just free-trade political posturing by Trump, and in practice, amounts only to a self-inflicted wound on the rapidly growing U.S. solar installation sector.

Neither perspective accounts, however, for the recent history of U.S. and Chinese solar subsidies, or indeed new subsidies for carbon capture and other clean energy sources that became law in the recent budget agreement.

Continue reading at The Hill. 

Happy Holidays from PPI

It’s been a surreal political year, but PPI has much to celebrate this holiday season. Throughout 2017, we expanded our productive capacity and the scope of our political and media outreach significantly. For example, PPI organized 150 meetings with prominent elected officials; visited 10 state capitals and 10 foreign capitals, published an influential book and more than 40 original research papers, and hosted nearly 30 private salon dinners on a variety of topical issues.
Best of all, we saw PPI’s research, analysis, and innovative ideas breaking through the political static and changing the way people think about some critical issues, including how to revive U.S. economic dynamism, spread innovation and jobs to people and places left behind by economic growth, and modernize the ways we prepare young people for work and citizenship.
Let me give you some highlights:
  • This fall, David Osborne’s new book, Reinventing America’s Schools, was published on the 25th anniversary of the nation’s first charter school in Minnesota. David, who heads PPI’s Reinventing America’s Schools project, documents the emergence of a new “21st Century” model for organizing and modernizing our public school system around the principles of school autonomy, accountability, choice, and diversity. David is just winding up a remarkable 20-city book tour that drew wide attention from education, political, and civic leaders, as well as the media. Because David is a great storyteller, as well as analyst, it’s a highly readable book that offers a cogent picture of a K-12 school system geared to the demands of the knowledge economy. It makes a great holiday gift!
  • Dr. Michael Mandel’s pioneering research on e-commerce and job creation also upended conventional wisdom and caught the attention of top economic commentators. Dr. Mandel, PPI’s chief economic strategist, found that online commerce has actually created more jobs in retail than it destroys, and that these new jobs (many in fulfillment centers in outlying areas) pay considerably better than traditional ones. His research buttresses the main premise of PPI’s progressive pro-growth agenda: that spreading digital innovation to the physical economy will create new jobs and businesses, raise labor productivity, and reduce inequality.
  • PPI challenged the dubious panacea of “free college” and proposed a progressive alternative – a robust system of post-secondary learning and credentials for the roughly 70 percent of young Americans who don’t get college degrees. PPI Senior Fellow Harry Holzer developed a creative menu of ways to create more “hybrid learning” opportunities combining work-based and classroom instruction. And PPI Senior Fellow Anne Kim highlighted the inequity of current government policies that subsidize college-bound youth (e.g., Pell Grants), but provide no help for people earning credentials certifying skills that employers value.
  • Building on last year’s opening of a PPI office in Brussels, we expanded our overseas work considerably in 2017. In January, I endeavored to explain the outcome of the U.S. election to shell-shocked audiences in London, Brussels, and Berlin. In April, we led our annual Congressional senior staff delegation to Paris, Brussels, and Berlin to engage European policymakers on the French presidential election and other U.S-E.U. issues, including international taxation, competition policy, and trade. PPI also took its message of data-driven innovation and growth to Australia, Brazil, Japan and a number of other countries.
Other 2017 highlights included a strategy retreat in February with two dozen top elected leaders to explore ideas for a new, radically pragmatic agenda for progressives; a Washington conference with our longtime friend Janet Napolitano (now President of the University of California system) on how to update and preserve NAFTA; public forums in Washington on pricing carbon, infrastructure, tax reform, and other pressing issues; creative policy reports on varied subjects; and a robust output of articles, op-eds, blogs, and social media activity.
I’m also happy to report many terrific additions to PPI in 2017. Rob Keast joined to manage our external relations and new policy development; Paul Bledsoe assumed a new role as Strategic Adviser as well as guiding our work on energy and climate policy; and Emily Langhorne joined as Education Policy Analyst. We will also be adding a fiscal project next year.
All this leaves us poised for a high-impact year in 2018. In this midterm-election year, our top priority will be crafting and building support for a new progressive platform — a radically pragmatic alternative to the political tribalism throttling America’s progress. That starts with new and better ideas for solving peoples’ problems that look forward, not backward, and that speak to their hopes and aspirations, not their anger and mistrust.
It’s a tall order, and we cannot succeed without your help and support. Thanks for all you have done over past years, and we look forward to working with you in 2018.
Happy holidays and New Year!

Rotherham for US News, “A Tale of Two Zinkes”

Interior, it landed pretty well. Zinke was a well-regarded former Navy SEAL and congressman known as a champion of protecting public lands and for being attentive to native issues. As opposed to some Trump nominees where defections of Republicans complicated the Senate math, Zinke was confirmed with a bipartisan 67 Senate votes – a landslide in the Trump-era.

During his Senate confirmation, Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, a pro-public lands conservation group, said, “Both Zinke and President-elect Trump have identified themselves as conservationists in the model of Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican who helped create America’s priceless public land heritage.”

That was then.

Now, Zinke finds himself in political trouble that ranges from just plain odd to possibly illegal. And, in the crucible, he hasn’t turned out to be the defender of public lands many hoped for.

 Continue reading at U.S. News & World Report. 

Bledsoe for The Hill, “Trump is isolated on climate. Ignore him at negotiations.”

As ministers from 195 countries travel to Bonn, Germany for annual climate negotiations to begin Nov. 6, momentous decisions await.

Convincing major-emitting nations to increase the pace of emissions reductions, gaining hundreds of billions in new private and public investment in clean energy, protecting vulnerable populations and finalizing key rules of the Paris Agreement will all be debated.

The backdrop? Increasingly deadly, hugely expensive climate change impacts now manifest in the U.S. and around the world and what scientists believe is a rapidly shrinking window of time to prevent far worse.

Within this urgent context, little effort should be spent worrying about or currying favor with Donald Trump or his appointees. Everything we’ve learned about Trump since he took office suggests it’s a fool’s errand to attempt to convince him to take more responsible action regarding climate change.

Continue reading at The Hill.

Bledsoe for The Hill, “Harvey, Irma show the skyrocketing costs of climate change”

Even as Congress passed $15 billion in initial funding for Hurricane Harvey relief, Americans were glued to their TVs watching Hurricane Irma, the strongest-ever Atlantic storm, bear down on Florida, where millions are still without power and other services.

Sadly, Congress, and the rest of us, had better get used to it. Harvey and Irma are just glimpses of the massive extra costs climate change is already extracting from U.S. taxpayers, a price tag that will only grow exponentially in coming years.

Continue reading at The Hill. 

Bledsoe for The Hill, “High-paying energy jobs are key for Democrats in 2018”

Clean-energy policies championed by Democrats over the last decade have helped create millions of high-paying energy jobs for American workers. And innovative Democratic policies going forward can help spur millions more good jobs — in energy efficiency, natural gas, nuclear energy, carbon capture, wind, solar, electric vehicles and infrastructure — in coming years.

This record of high-wage job creation stands in stark contrast to Donald Trump’s false coal-dust promises to somehow bring back jobs using 19th century energy strategies.

But, as Democrats look toward the mid-term elections, their candidates must talk about energy in the right way. They must put high-wage energy jobs first, national security gains second and environmental benefits third, to tap into voters’ concerns to garner the electoral benefits their policies deserve.

Continue reading at The Hill.

Bledsoe for The Hill, “US can boost gas exports, cut global emissions in one fell swoop”

Infamously, Donald Trump has called climate change a hoax, but the rest of the world knows better. In fact, the main reason European and Asian nations are interested in importing U.S. natural gas is to displace coal and cut greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change.

If the Trump administration truly cares about expanding U.S. gas exports, as they claim, they should maximize the competitive advantage that lower-emitting U.S. natural gas has over not only coal, but also over higher-emitting Russian gas.

This means the administration should stop the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) attempt to rollback domestic regulations of methane emissions from gas development, and perhaps use the threat of sanctions against Russian gas pipelines (as allowed under the new Russia sanctions law) to expand U.S. markets.

Continue reading at The Hill.

Marshall & Bledsoe for Real Clear Energy, “Colorado Blazes Low-Emissions, High-Employment Energy Pathway”

Donald Trump made political hay in Appalachian and industrial states by running as an ardent booster of coal. Yet what’s really powered America’s remarkable energy boom over the last decade is shale oil and natural gas, renewable solar and wind, clean-tech and energy efficiency.

Energy innovation, in short, is the key to creating more good jobs and lowering U.S. carbon emissions. But given the Trump administration’s animus toward energy technology funding and low-carbon approaches generally, much of the political leadership for America’s next energy revolution will have to come from states where Democrats are in charge.

Take Colorado, which is aggressively pursuing energy innovation across the full spectrum of fuels and technologies. Governor John Hickenlooper has crafted a pro-growth, low-emissions agenda that should be a model to other states and to national policymakers. It emphasizes shale gas, wind, solar, hydropower, efficiency and advanced technology in everything from zero emissions electric cars to home net electricity metering.

Continue read at Real Clear Energy. 

Bledsoe for the Economist, “Whither the world after America’s retreat?”

…The risks posed by a changing climate require action. Last year was the hottest since records began, and 16 of the 17 warmest years have occurred since 2001. Sea level is rising and the polar regions are melting. Extreme storms, droughts and winds already threaten the safety and livelihood of millions. Despite all this, America is now attempting to leave. It will be a complex process that could take years. Renegotiating the Paris accord, or replacing it, could be even harder. Reaching the deal took decades in the first place. Countries which “bent over backwards” to please America—by ensuring the deal was not legally binding among other measures—are hardly likely to start again from scratch points out Paul Bledsoe, a climate policy expert from American University in Washington, DC.

Continue reading at The Economist.

 

Bledsoe for Politico: How Trump can help save coal-with China’s help

Last week, President Donald Trump declared that he would bring back coal jobs, directing the EPA to roll back the Clean Power Plan and other regulations on coal producers. It’s an audacious promise given the recent trajectory of the industry, and most energy experts dismissed it as impossible.

But there is one way for Trump to slow the loss of coal-related jobs and it has nothing to do with undermining climate regulations: Rather, it runs through China.

As Trump meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping today, he has a rare chance to build relations with a global rival and help keep one of his domestic promises. The reason is clean coal technology.

Read more at Politico. 

Gifford for The Hill: Why Trump’s Climate Order Might Backfire

Here’s some friendly advice to U.S. business leaders who may be quietly cheering plans by President Trump and his new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Scott Pruitt, to “drain the swamp” by gutting environmental regulations: Be careful what you wish for.

Not only will many Americans view such a rollback as radical, but it’s also likely to provoke a torrent of lawsuits, tempting federal and state courts to step into the policy vacuum created by a weakened regulatory regime.

Martha Coakley, the former Democratic attorney general of Massachusetts, predicts that even Republican state attorneys general will consider pairing with private plaintiffs’ attorneys to file tort actions to protect the environment in the absence of viable federal regulation. A new spate of public nuisance litigation — the tort du jour for environmental activists seeking “regulation through litigation” -— would likely result in a far more draconian and unstable set of environmental rules that what’s currently on the books.

Continue reading at The Hill. 

Flashback Friday: PPI in Hindsight

Just over a year ago, PPI unveiled a big ideas blueprint with a prescient subtitle: Unleashing Innovation and Growth: A Progressive Alternative to Populism. We knew that progressives in the United States and Europe needed better answers to the economic and cultural grievances that have fueled the rise of a retrograde populism and nationalism around the world. We did not foresee that Democrats would fail to offer a forward-looking plan for jobs and shared growth, opening the door to Donald Trump’s improbable victory.

Which makes the themes and ideas in PPI’s sweeping policy blueprint more important than ever. Populism today thrives in the political vacuum left by center-left parties that offer no clear vision for reviving economic dynamism and hope. “Winning the economic argument will be essential to victory in the 2016 elections and it starts by getting the diagnosis right,” the blueprint noted. Instead, Democrats ran a campaign that leaned heavily on identity politics, wealth redistribution and centralized, small-bore solutions.

Unleashing argued that America (and Europe) are stuck in a slow-growth trap that holds down wages and living standards. And it offered bold prescriptions for building on America’s competitive advantage in technology and entrepreneurship to spread innovation – now concentrated in a vibrant digital sector — to the nation’s physical economy, which continues to suffer from low productivity. In addition, the document proposed creative ways to modernize the nation’s economic infrastructure, improve the regulatory environment for innovation, build middle class wealth and empower poor Americans to work, save and chart their own course to social mobility and inclusion.

Crucially, the blueprint also urged progressives to reject anger and victimhood and offer voters a confident account for how America can build a new, inclusive prosperity:

What America needs is a forward-looking plan to unleash innovation, stimulate productive investment, groom the world’s most talented workers, and put our economy back on a high-growth path, It’s time to banish fear and pessimism and trust instead in the liberal and individualist values and enterprising culture that have always made America great.

That was the road not taken in 2016. Now it’s the road to political relevance and success for progressives here and elsewhere.

 

Aldy Testimony for the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce

Statement of Joseph E. Aldy
Associate Professor of Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School
Visiting Fellow, Resources for the Future
Faculty Research Fellow, National Bureau of Economic Research
Senior Adviser, Center for Strategic and International Studies

United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Energy, hearing on “Federal Energy Related Tax Policy and Its Effects on Markets, Prices, and Consumers”

[gview file="https://www.progressivepolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/HHRG-115-IF03-Wstate-AldyJ-20170329.pdf" title="the-great-swap"]