Beto O'Rourke needs to regain some of the momentum that accompanied the launch of his presidential campaign in March. His campaign has floundered in recent weeks, overshadowed by the rise of South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who has surpassed O'Rourke in recent polls. The former congressman and failed Senate candidate is currently in sixth place, according to the Real Clear Politics polling average, and is just fourth among white male candidates in the crowded Democratic primary field. Even the ladies of The View are starting to lose interest in his candidacy.
Accordingly, O'Rourke has unveiled an ambitious plan to combat climate change. In what may or may not be a coincidence, the date of the plan's release, April 29, just happens to be the birthday of Japanese Emperor Hirohito, who led the Axis nation during World War II, the global conflict O'Rourke has frequently compared to the threat posed by climate change.
It's the first major policy proposal for a campaign that has been criticized for a lack of policy specifics. The plan itself, however, is not very specific. It is a mishmash of vague, snazzy jargon, with a dash of apocalyptic rhetoric about how climate change is "the greatest threat we face," and how "we have one last chance to unleash the ingenuity and political will of hundreds of millions of Americans to meet this moment before it's too late."
O'Rourke envisions a total price tag of $5 trillion over the next decade, paid for in part ($1.5 trillion) by making sure rich people and corporations "pay their fair share." This initial down payment would then be "mobilized" and "leveraged" by "proven existing financial institutions" and a "new dedicated finance authority" to fund "pioneering solutions" and "technological breakthroughs." Cool!
What about a carbon tax? The plan doesn't mention it. What about nuclear power? That's not clear, either. The plan calls for a series of "limited-duration, performance-focused climate change tax incentives" designed to "accelerate the scale up of nascent technologies enabling reductions in greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors, through efficiency and alternatives." Wow!
The plan outlines a goal of achieving net-zero carbon emission in the United States by the year 2050, and establishing a "legally enforceable standard" to ensure that half of the goal is achieved by 2030. The United States accounts for just 15 percent of global carbon emissions.
O'Rourke's campaign claims this goal is in line with the controversial Green New Deal introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.), but that's not entirely accurate. A Green New Deal fact sheet released by Ocasio-Cortez's suggests the United States must fully achieve net-zero emissions by 2030 to avert a global catastrophe. This would cost as much as $9 trillion per year, according to one estimate.
O'Rourke's plan might be cheap by comparison, but $5 trillion over a decade ($500 billion per year) isn't pocket change. To put the total cost of O'Rourke's ambitious climate agenda into crucial context, consider that $5 trillion is more than the following:
- The GDP of Japan ($4.9 trillion)
- The combined market cap of Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft ($4.4 trillion)
- The GDP of the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and South Africa combined ($4.3 trillion)
- Total U.S. spending on World War II ($4.1 trillion, inflation adjusted)
- Beto O'Rourke's net worth (Between $3.5 million and $16 million)
- The GDP of the United States ($19.4 trillion) multiplied by the portion of O'Rourke's income (0.7 percent) he has donated to charity since 2008 ($136 billion)
- The amount a majority of Americans say the are willing to spend to combat climate change ($1 per month)