WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, members of the Western Caucus and subject matter experts released statements attacking the Green New Deal after the Western Caucus' forum and press conference on Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's legislation:

Chairman Paul Gosar (AZ-04): "The Green New Deal would drive energy production and jobs to countries like China and India that have much worse environmental standards. Global greenhouse gas emissions will increase as a result, in direct contradiction to the main talking point for the Green New Deal. The socialist Green New Deal attempts to provide education, health care and housing to all. The Mercatus Center estimates that the costs of the single-payer health care provision alone would cost $32 trillion in the first 10 years. The Green New Deal is an alarmist pipe dream that seeks to fundamentally “transform America” without a blueprint. This socialist manifesto changes by the day and important details on how a transition of the Green New Deal’s magnitude will occur are missing, including how we will pay for this pie in the sky aspiration."

Vice-Chairman for Indian Affairs and Oceans Don Young (AK-At Large): "The Green New Deal is a PR stunt that will never become law. I’ve fought to secure the rights of Alaskans to develop energy on their lands, and this proposal would turn the clock back on the progress we’ve made. The Green New Deal is a bad deal for Alaska, and I’ll keep fighting this massive government overreach."

Chief Rules Officer Dan Newhouse (WA-04): "The Democrats’ Green New Deal is a bad deal for the American People and ignores sound science. It calls for cutting greenhouse-gas emissions to net zero in just ten years—which could cost Americans $93 trillion. The drafters of this plan set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in ten years because they ‘aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.’ Government intervention and control of Americans’ lives at this enormous scale is no laughing matter. It dictates that in ten years every existing building in this country must be upgraded and retrofitted for ‘comfort.’ The drafters also want to subsidize those who are ‘unwilling to work.’ It defies sound science by ignoring clean sources of energy like those that power my home state of Washington. Washington relies on clean, renewable, and affordable hydroelectric dams for 70 percent of our power, but the Green New Deal ignores hydropower completely. It would even phase out the clean and reliable baseload energy provided by nuclear power. This Green New Deal would be catastrophic for the American economy and way of life. We must respect our environment, ensure clean air and water for our citizens, and encourage innovative way to produce energy through a variety of reliable, renewable, traditional, and alternative sources."

Michael Zehr, Consumer Energy Alliance: "American consumers need practical energy solutions that come from our nation’s existing mix of affordable energy resources. As it stands, the Green New Deal does not offer cost-efficient or sustainable solutions for hardworking families and businesses across our country." Mr. Zehr also testified that the Green New Deal is estimated to cost hard-working Americans $155.5 billion to replace furnaces, $50 billion to replace water heaters, $11.9 billion to replace gas dryers and $26 billion to replace stoves. "

Myron Ebell, Competitive Enterprise Institute: "The Green New Deal is neither green, nor particularly new, and is about as bad a deal as can be imagined. Its name hearkens back to the romantic memories many Americans have of the New Deal. The New Deal of the 1930s was a series of relatively modest ad hoc programs intended to put people back to work and lift the economy out of the Depression. But the Green New Deal is much more ambitious than the New Deal."

Katie Tubb, The Heritage Foundation: "The ‘Green New Deal’ resolution is filled with lessons. It is exactly how not to successfully enact desperately needed infrastructure investment. It is exactly how not to enact a progressive agenda to address our nation’s dangerous income inequality. And it is exactly how not to win support for critical measures to curb climate change… According to the resolution, a ‘Green New Deal’ would require every car to be electric-powered and ban all fossil fuels, among other proposals. It is difficult to take this unrealistic manifesto seriously, but the economic and social devastation it would cause if it moves forward is serious and real."

Rick Manning, Americans For Limited Government: “Socialism is always a failure. It deprives people of freedom, choice, property and opportunity. The Green New Deal is nothing more or less than a new rationale for a failed government system that has always resulted in enslavement and deprivation of the people — and it must be rejected.”

Marc Morano, Director of Communication, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow: "The environmental Left has been using green scares to push for the same solutions we see today — wealth redistribution, central planning, sovereignty limiting treaties — since the overpopulation scars of the 1960s and 1970s."

Mandy Gunasekara, Energy 45 Fund: "The only thing serious about the Green New Deal is how dangerous it really is for the nation. For those willing to set aside politics, Congress has an opportunity to work collaboratively with President Trump and focus on solutions that enhance market-driven innovations without limiting our position as an energy superpower. Our entire economy is built on successful production, efficient development and affordable use of fossil-based energy resources. The path of the future is not to shut off use of these resources, but to continue to develop them in the cleanest, most efficient way possible and then share these innovations with the world."

Dr. David Legates, Professor of Climatology, University of Delaware: "The New Green Deal is not about stopping climate change. Climate always changes and always will. The United States has cut back on greenhouse gas emissions by about 13% since 2005 to virtually no effect. The net effect of reducing the United States carbon dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050 will only have an effect of lowering global averaged temperature by 0.1 degrees Celsius in 2100. Even reduction by 100% will have little effect on the climate, but the policies proposed by the New Green Deal would make Karl Marx proud. But realize this; any draconian changes such as these would necessarily change our fundamental way of life."

Bill Imbergamo, Federal Forest Resource Coalition: "Solely focusing on reforestation as the Green New Deal does largely misses the mark if your goal is to increase carbon sequestration, storage, or emissions reduction from our public forests.The best way to accomplish that is to actively manage the portions of the National Forests that are open to management – a relatively small percentage compared to the 36 million acres of wilderness and nearly 60 million acres of roadless lands. By harvesting trees, you can store carbon in long-lasting wood products, or displace fossil fuels through renewable biomass, and reestablish fast growing young trees that can suck up even more carbon. If you do it before fires burn, you can improve wildlife habitat and protect water quality in the process."

Thomas Pyle, American Energy Alliance: “For nearly a decade now, the United States, long blessed with vast natural resources, has benefited from the greatest energy expansion in the history of the world. Our energy producers have delivered the low cost, affordable and reliable energy that has fueled economic growth and opportunity for all Americans, no matter their race, sex, creed, or color. We have drilled our way to prosperity here at home and, as this energy revolution continues, the U.S. will lift millions of people out of energy poverty around the globe. The reason the Green New Deal is so dangerous is because it threatens the lifeblood of our economy and our way of life. The Green New Deal, put simply, is politically impossible, technologically infeasible, and economically illogical.”

Congressman Ken Calvert (CA-42): "The Green New Deal is a $93 trillion plan to strip money and liberties away from American families. It doesn’t take a bigger government to improve our environment, and it certainly doesn’t require adopting socialist policies."

Congressman Duncan Hunter (CA-50): "Green New Deal advocates will argue their proposal is only a House Resolution, without the force of law, an expression of Congress with which to start a dialogue and conversation.  Any such conversation, however, must start with truth.  The truth is America did not get where it is through top down government mandates that kill the innovative spark that fuels small business and defines the very nature of our energetic and expanding economy.  Americans got to where it is through the ingenuity and tenacity of the American people, empowered by the freedoms enshrined in our constitution.  The Green New Deal is the Old Socialist Steal and deserves to be rejected.  A much more productive use of time is finding more ways to encourage the private sector and the free market involved in innovative energy science to do what it does best, invest in America."

Congressman Dusty Johnson (SD-At Large): "This plan is so outrageous that it’s been called the 'Green Dream.' If Democrats did their homework, they would know that just a few months ago Congress delivered a Green New Deal – It’s called the 2018 Farm Bill. And it delivered historic investments and collaboration with producers for improvements in Conservation, Forest management, and Energy Efficiency."

Congressman Markwayne Mullin (OK-02): "The proposed Green New Deal is House Democrats’ socialist manifesto. It plans to eliminate air travel, end the use of fossil fuels, and replace every building in the United States in the next 10 years is all a part of a master plan to allow government to take over buildings, businesses, and modes of transportation. The Green New Deal is a detriment to our freedom and our democracy."

House Natural Resources Ranking Republican Rob Bishop (UT-01) ate a hamburger at the press conference in response to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s attacks on agriculture, cows and hamburgers. Cortez claimed she wanted to “get rid of farting cows” and subsequently doubled down against hamburgers and agriculture stating, "In the [Green New] Deal, what we talk about is...that we need to take a look at factory farming, period. It’s wild…Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch and dinner…We have to take a look at everything."

Background:

The February 27, 2019 Western Caucus Policy Forum provided the first in-depth public review of the Green New Deal (GND) by Congress and closely examined this proposal in order to gain a better understanding of its details and implications. Members of the Western Caucus and outside witnesses were adamant at the Forum that a transition of this magnitude can not occur in 10 years, expressed concern about the estimated $93 trillion cost of the Green New deal and testified that the Green New Deal is a trojan horse for socialism that will have significant negative impacts on jobs, society, the environment, the economy, as well as on our agriculture, energy and transportation sectors.

The forum was live-streamed on the Western Caucus website HERE. The press conference was live-streamed on our Facebook page HERE. 

A detailed memo with more information about the forum can be found HERE. 

A fact page containing the estimated costs of the Green New Deal can be found HERE.  A media kit for the forum can be found HERE. 

To learn more about the Green New Deal, our forum and press conference, please click HERE to visit our Green New Deal page. 

---