“This year’s races are the first major electoral test for the Green New Deal, which was thrust into the national spotlight following the 2018 midterm elections. And so far, few Democrats in the most competitive races think it’s a winner.”

“… Democrats in close races are denouncing both the Green New Deal and quickly banning hydraulic fracturing when they get the opportunity, and are instead laying out their own, less aggressive plans to fight climate change.” (E&E News, below)

In a ‘Campaign 2020’ essay (October 20, 2020), Timothy Cama of E&E News indirectly documents the obvious: Americans like their energy affordable convenient, and reliable. And what is true today will always be, putting the Green Agenda of energy scarcity and inconvenience on the defensive against nature and reality.

Jerry Taylor–libertarian-turned-statist (see here and here)–warned back in March 2019 when the Green New Deal emerged:

… the strategies and tactics you are pursuing through the Green New Deal amount to political malpractice.

“We find that the arguments marshaled to support the hypothesis that a transition to a soft energy economy is inevitable are riddled with economic errors and are thus less than compelling. Moreover, we can’t help but note that past predictions by soft energy advocates about the future of the energy economy have proven wildly incorrect.”

– Jerry Taylor and Peter VanDoren (1999)

Twenty-one years ago, Jerry Taylor and Peter VanDoren of the Cato Institute published a journal article, “The Soft Case for Soft Energy,” in a special issue of the Journal of International Affairs, Fueling the 21st Century: The New Political Economy of Energy (Fall 1999). This article remains sound and prescient, with political energies continuing to be government-dependent versus their superior rivals.

This 11,000-word, 101-footnote essay is the longest and most comprehensive of Jerry Taylor’s career–and the most notable journal article he has published.…

Don’t forget that just before the World was upended by coronavirus, we had another deep-decarbonization electrification bill: the 555-page American Energy Innovation Act (AEIA). 

Since “clean energy” unfairly discriminates against the leading (and clean) alternatives to electricity, this is contrary to the best interests of free markets and providing affordable energy for consumers.

Yes; another “stimulus” bill is possible and perhaps even likely. Expect Nancy Pelosi’s “Green New Deal” to be part of this effort given that the Senate and the President said NO to subsidies for solar panels and wind turbines in the CARES Act. 

Numerous special interests didn’t get their piece of the pie and were promised another shot in order to move the CARES Act out of the Senate.  It’s all politics, not consumer economics, for the pack of lobbyists in an election year, trading campaign contributions for legislative favors.…

There’s a war on conservativism, but it’s not coming from the Left. Whether it’s the Soros-funded Niskanen Center, Citizens’ Climate Lobby, or the Center for Responsible Energy Solutions, the goal is the same: push the Left’s global warming agenda on conservatives—and label it “free market.” But when it comes to their funding, these eco-cons have one message: Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain! (Hayden Ludwig, Green Watch, Capital Research Center, November 5, 2019)

Unlimited money can buy a lot of things, including panels at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) annual meeting, hosted by the American Conservative Union, being held this week in Washington, DC. Two of the worst panels concern a disguised plea to implement a federal carbon tax on the pretense that such a policy will “win” the climate fight with the Left (wrong!…