[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 6, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1671-S1672]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           The Green New Deal

  Mr. President, on another matter, in recent months our Nation has 
watched the Democratic Party take a sharp and abrupt left turn toward 
socialism.
  A flawed ideology that has been rejected time and again across the 
world is now driving the marquee policy proposals of the new House 
Democratic majority, and nothing encapsulates this as clearly as the 
huge, self-inflicted, national wound the Democrats are agitating for 
called the Green New Deal.
  Let's review a few of the greatest hits in this particular proposal.
  Democrats have decided that every building in America needs to be 
either overhauled or replaced altogether. They are putting homeowners 
and small business owners on alert. The all-

[[Page S1672]]

knowing central planners here in the Nation's capital are raring to 
remodel the entire country.
  Up next: ending all fossil fuel and nuclear energy production. Forget 
about coal and all of the jobs it supports in my State of Kentucky and 
around the country. Forget about the oil and natural gas industry and 
all of those jobs as well. The list goes on.
  Oh, by the way, forget about nuclear, too--proving that this proposal 
doesn't even pretend to be a serious effort to reduce carbon emissions. 
It is just a statement of what sounds trendy in New York and San 
Francisco.
  Anyone seriously concerned about carbon would know that nuclear power 
generates a majority of America's carbon-free electricity. You would 
think the carbon police would be glad that from 1995 to 2016, American 
nuclear power met the emissions equivalent of keeping 3 billion cars 
off the road.
  Let me say that again. You would think the carbon police would be 
glad that from 1995 to 2016, American nuclear power met the emissions 
equivalent of keeping 3 billion cars off the road.
  Oh, but alas, these Democrats will not let facts get in the way of 
what is fashionable.
  Besides, why should America bother being a net exporter of energy 
when we could leave all of that economic potential to competitors like 
China?
  Naturally, as background documents explained, this means eliminating 
all combustion engines--cars, lawn mowers, commercial airliners. 
Everything must go. Everything must go.
  By the way, that backgrounder really helps clarify another goal 
behind all of this. It is providing ``economic security,'' even those 
who are ``unwilling to work.''
  All of this and more can be ours for the low, low price of a 
staggering expansion of centralized government and--wait for it--upward 
of a mere $93 trillion. Ninety-three trillion is more than every dollar 
our Federal Government has spent in its entire history to date--
combined. It is more than the combined annual GDP of every nation on 
Earth.
  As our colleague Senator Blunt and the policy committee have pointed 
out, this amount of money could rebuild the entire Interstate Highway 
System every single year--just for the heck of it--for 250 years, and 
you would still have a little left over--a little left over.
  Or maybe Americans would rather have something nicer to drive on the 
roads we already have. For the comparatively cheap price of just $66 
trillion, I am told the government could buy every American a Ferrari. 
What a great idea. For the comparatively cheap price of just $66 
trillion, the government could buy every American a Ferrari. But, of 
course, everyone would have to get their driving in before Democrats 
ban the internal combustion engine.
  To be clear, $93 trillion is just one number and one attempt to 
estimate the pricetag of this fantasy novel. The proposal is so lacking 
in details and math that it is almost impossible for analysts to even 
know where to begin trying to connect it to the real world.
  Let's talk about where this money would come from. That is always a 
question worth asking.
  If we spread that $93 trillion out over 10 years and over every 
American household, we get about $65,000 per household--$65,000 every 
year for every household. The median income in this country is around 
$60,000. So, like any good socialist plan, I am sure we would hear a 
lot about soaking the rich.
  We always do. We would hear that wealthy Americans could pay for this 
whole thing, if only they were sufficiently civic-minded, but, of 
course, that is not even close to accurate. A huge share of the bill 
would land at the feet of the American middle class. There are not 
enough billionaires--there are not enough billionaires to pay the 
trillions needed for this massive government plan.
  Even if Washington decided the IRS should grab every single cent of 
adjusted gross income above $1 million, all of it taken, it would only 
bring in a little over one-tenth--one-tenth--of what the Green New Deal 
is estimated to cost every year. Take all the money away from the 
millionaires, it would only bring in a little over one-tenth of what 
the Green New Deal is estimated to cost every year.
  In fact, in order to break even on this proposal alone, the Federal 
Government would have to take $9 of every $10 that every single 
American earns. The Federal Government would have to take $9 out of $10 
of everything every American earns.
  You had better believe that families' last dollar would need to go 
toward keeping the lights on. By one analysis, middle-class families 
could see their power bills jump by more than $300 a month under the 
Green New Deal. That would take up the last dollar they had left.
  I know Senator Ernst and several of our colleagues will be speaking 
at greater length on this issue later today, and I am sure each of them 
will point out that there certainly is one green thing about this 
sprawling proposal, one green thing: the huge, unprecedented pile of 
middle-class families' money that Democrats are itching--itching--to 
grab.