EcoWatch - A new report by the Net Zero Industrial Policy Lab at Johns Hopkins
University explains the high cost that would come to the U.S. if the
incoming Trump administration repeals existing climate policies. According to the report, Donald Trump’s plans to undo climate policies would cost the U.S. billions of dollars. Rolling back policies such as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)
would create lost opportunities for U.S. manufacturing and trade,
leading to job losses, tax revenue declines and losses in exports, the
report authors said.
“Our scenario analysis shows that U.S.
repeal of the IRA would, in the most likely scenario, harm U.S.
manufacturing and trade and create up to $80 billion in investment
opportunities for other countries, including major U.S. competitors like
China,” the authors wrote. “U.S. harm would come in the form of lost factories, lost jobs, lost tax revenue, and up to $50 billion in lost exports.”
As The Guardian reported, these repealed policies would lead to a loss of opportunities
in clean energy for the U.S., while China and other nations will gain
money and power when it comes to developing solar and wind energy
infrastructure, electric vehicles, battery storage and more.
In 2023, China already installed more solar panels in one year than the U.S. has in total. As of July 2024, Global Energy Monitor found
that China had projects with about 180 gigawatts of utility-scale solar
power and 159 gigawatts of wind power in progress, which is about
double the capacity of utility-scale renewables under construction
compared to the rest of the world.
Even if the U.S. invests more
in fossil fuels and strips back investments and progress in clean energy
projects under the new administration, the rest of the world is
continuing the transition to clean energy, which has already led to
economic gains globally. As the International Energy Agency (IEA)
reported, clean energy made up 10% of economic growth
in 2023, and clean energy accounted for about 80% of new electricity
capacity additions last year. There has also been a growth in
electrified transportation, with one in five cars sold globally being
EVs.
New Republic - An
authoritarianism scholar sounded alarm bells that Donald Trump’s
incoming Cabinet nominees will do far more than usher a new conservatism
into the federal government. Instead, they’ll challenge the system to
the point of rendering federal agencies practically ineffective and
vulnerable to complete dismantling. In an interview with MSNBC’s
Ali Velshi, Yale history professor Timothy Snyder insisted that Trump’s
nominees to lead the executive branch aren’t just “poor choices in the
traditional sense.”
“Each
of them individually is historically bad,” said Snyder. “But taken
together, these are not people who are going to be bad at their jobs in
some sort of normal sense. Taken together, these appointments suggest an
attempt to actually make the American government dysfunctional, to make
it fall apart, to pervert it, to have it do things that it’s not
supposed to do until it’s not capable of doing anything at all.”
Guardian - Donald Trump said on Monday that his administration would declare a national emergency and use the US military to carry out mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.
Washington Post - Trump allies have discussed making big changes to Medicaid and food stamps.
Alternet - Liberal economist Paul Krugman, in his November 11 column for the New York Times, warns that grocery prices will soar if Trump follows through on his mass deportations plan.
"I've written about the likely inflationary impact of Donald Trump's policies," Krugman explains. "All of that still stands. But there's an issue that I haven't stressed as much as I probably should have: the specific effects of his proposed deportations on grocery and housing prices, both of which have been political flashpoints."
According to Krugman, Trump's "mass deportations" would "degrade productive capacity, balloon deficits and - yes - bring inflation roaring back."
"If you're upset about grocery prices now," Krugman explains, "see what happens if Trump goes after a huge part of the agricultural workforce. Immigrants are around three-quarters of agricultural workers - and roughly half of them are undocumented. And do you really doubt that many workers legally here will be caught up in Trump's threatened dragnets?"
MSNBC - The Presidential Transition Act of 1963
directs the FBI to conduct... background checks “expeditiously” for
“individuals that the President-elect has identified for high level
national security positions.” But what if he never formally identifies and submits his picks to the Department of Justice and the FBI? In his last administration, Trump overrode security adjudicators who denied clearances for his son-in-law, Jared Kushner,
and many others, after FBI background checks resulted in national
security concerns. This time, he appears poised to dispense with the FBI
checks and potentially with the Senate confirmation process by making recess appointments.
That leaves us with two pertinent memorandums of understanding which should enable President Joe Biden and/or the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to quickly do something to preserve national security and the Constitution’s advice, and consent powers conferred on our elected lawmakers...
First, Biden should rely upon the existing MOU
between the Department of Justice and his office, as well as the
Presidential Transition Act, to investigate the people Trump says he
wants to put in office. The MOU sets out procedures for requesting
background investigations of nominees “at the request of the president.”
It doesn’t say the president-elect, it says “president.” That’s you,
Joe. As for the transition act, it reads as applying to people “…the
President-elect has identified” for high-level positions. Well, the
president-elect has already publicly identified those people. And Biden
should respond.
What happens if a nominee refuses to
cooperate, won’t provide his consent to be investigated or won’t fill
out any forms? The MOU has a remedy for that: “The DOJ and FBI may
consider a request from the President for a name check or BI without the
consent of the appointee if justified by extraordinary circumstances.”....
The Senate Judiciary Committee has its own pertinent MOU
with the Counsel to the President. That document says the committee
“shall have access to” the FBI reports on nominees for attorney general,
FBI director or summaries for “all other DOJ nominees and non-judicial
nominees.” Emphasis on all other and non-judicial. We know senators want the details
of the House Ethics Committee inquiry into former Rep. Matt Gaetz,
Trump's pick for attorney general. An FBI background investigation would
certainly include a request to review that report, as well as the DOJ
criminal investigation, now closed, into Gaetz. The Senate Judiciary
Committee should make a bipartisan request for an FBI background check
of Trump's picks now. Regardless of party affiliation, if senators
relinquish their advice and consent authority or confirm a nominee
without benefit of knowing the risk they pose, then they set a precedent
for never again exercising their constitutional powers.
