CMV: The Green New Deal distracts from climate change, by tying climate change to
left-leaning policy/rhetoric. The bill seems designed to raise republican opposition,
and is a disappointment/insulting for people who believe that climate change is the
#1 issue of our lifetime.
I would first recommend reading [The Green New Deal](https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hres109/BILLS-116hres109ih.pdf)
if you haven't already, its about 14 pages, with huge spacing (about 3-4 real pages).
But to summarize the bill in my own words, the Green New Deal calls for essentially
every democratic agenda to be passed into law(to include climate change). As a democrat,
I agree with most of the agenda items(it's literally the democratic agenda), but there
is something wrong with creating a bill like this.
By tying together climate change, and a plethora of other issues, like equal protection
and rights for illegal immigrants, government-run(?) healthcare for all, etc, it is
ensuring intense opposition by non democrats.
Since I do not believe any rational human being could read the bill, and think it
would get bi partisan support, my view is that there was no real intention of ever
getting the bill passed into law/policy.
(Sure, the gender wage gap is important, so are Native American rights... But there's
no need to make that stand on a climate change bill, and doing so is insulting to the Americans who want to see huge climate change initiatives as our national policy)
**The abridged, loose, logical argument:**
Premise 1) If you want a bill to get passed into law, when possible, you will write
it in a bi partisan way.
Premise 2) Climate change can be written in a Bi-Partisan way
Premise 3) The Green New Deal was not written in a bi partisan way(or was written
in a partisan way).
Conclusion) The Green New Deal was not written to be passed into law.
(And this disappoints me, because in my opinion, climate change is the #1 issue of my lifetime.)
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Edit 1: I learned that the intent of the bill wasn't necessarily to pass something
into law, but more of a political statement or some sort of rally cry. Not sure how
I feel about that one or what changes, but its worth noting. (its a function of a
specific type of house resolution)
Edit 2: After reading some of these posts, I now realize that the Green New Deal is
actually divisive within the democratic party, and received a (soft) "bipartisan"
rejection in the senate. This seems to indicate the increased importance of having a specific targeted bill, as it seemed
some senators did not want to go on record supporting it, because of what it said.
Debate.org
DebateWise
Pro vs. con view
Topic space view