Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal is a radical front for nationalizing our economy


Details of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's long-awaited Green New Deal have dropped. On Thursday, alongside Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, she published a resolution and Q&A document that laid out the aims and tools intended to transform the United States into a zero net emissions economy.

At least, that's how it was sold.

Delve into the text, and the climate change-curbing veneer amounts to a Trojan horse for a bigger nationalization of the economy than seen under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The sponsors themselves say their goal is the "massive transformation of our society" in a progressive image, rather than simply stopping global warming.

How else can one explain policies that include a federal jobs guarantee, economic security for those unable to work, provision of housing, free health care, higher education for all and a family living wage? Besides the plan's calls for electrifying the whole transport system and undertaking a crippling federal financing of renewable energy over 10 years, it reads like a wish list for socializing the economy.

Read more commentary:

Kids, it's time to give your parents 'the talk.' Not that one, the one on climate change.

Tax the wealthiest of the 0.1 percent? Not so fast.

Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib are honest Democrats. And their party can't stand it.

It is hard to make a good faith critique of this plan, because it features a nearly complete denial of trade-offs or costs. This is surprising given that Ocasio-Cortez herself has a degree in economics, for which the study of trade-offs is the basis.

Take the environmental policy proposals, for example. Most Americans believe that climate change is happening, is influenced by human activity and has social costs. The idea that private action alone cannot overcome this, and governments must act, is a reasonable view.

The cost of going 'green'

But even in some parallel universe where it was possible to implement an agenda that would replace the whole country's energy supply with government-financed renewables, refurbish every building to improve energy efficiency, eliminate gas burning cars, build extensive high-speed rail and cut the number of flights and cows to near zero, the cost would be astronomical.

Previous estimates from Stanford engineers of meeting power demand through clean, renewable zero-emission energy sources put capital costs at $14.6 trillion (almost three-quarters of current annual GDP). The running costs, coupled with all the other environmental programs, would therefore take up a huge chunk of economic resources, effectively cutting vast private sector activity.

That's why the resolution seeks to mobilize society as in World War II, which Ocasio-Cortez claims is the appropriate analogy. If the nation can be convinced the overwhelming social goal is countering the existential threat of climate change at all costs, then people would be willing to make sacrifices - be it lost economic growth, fewer flights or less beef.

Yet it's difficult to make that case when you then tack on a myriad of unrelated policies to the program. According to the resolution, decarbonization must also be supported by a massive expansion of social spending. Ocasio-Cortez's plan suggests it's not true that we must take a hit today to ensure the planet's future - according to this we'll be richer too!

Just to ram home the absence of trade-offs, we are also told this will be financed by printed money. Ocasio-Cortez subscribes to the view that governments can apparently spend and spend forever, with the only constraint being the capacity of the economy. Yet, even under the crank Modern Monetary Theory model that recommends this, inflation will surely result from so much new government spending.

By investing in inefficient energy sources and taking labor and capital away from productive industries, economic capacity will shrink as well - making this outcome more likely.

Ordinarily, a pitch to put society on a war footing to adopt expensive power sources, restrict people's ability to fly and eat what they want, and redistribute vast new sums of printed money would be considered politically bonkers. Yet remarkably, Democratic presidential candidates, including Sens. Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Kirsten Gillibrand, have endorsed this resolution.

It's easy to think they've lost their minds. But maybe they've noted that it's easy to label those who disagree on climate policy as being "deniers" of science itself. By tagging this a "Green New Deal," Democrats can shift debate toward radical unrelated positions, denouncing those who oppose them as wanting to kill the planet itself.

Make no mistake, this green-painted Trojan horse is filled with the biggest single government expansion the United States has seen since the 1930s.

Ryan Bourne is the R. Evan Scharf chair for the Public Understanding of Economics at the Cato institute. You can follow him on Twitter: @MrRBourne.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal is a radical front for nationalizing our economy


More Related News

Swedish student leader wins EU pledge to spend billions on climate
Swedish student leader wins EU pledge to spend billions on climate

In a speech alongside 16-year-old Greta Thunberg in Brussels, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker also criticized U.S. President Donald Trump for suggesting climate change was "invented" and "ideological". "In the next financial period from 2021 to 2027, every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards action to mitigate climate change," Juncker said of his proposal for the EU budget, which is typically 1 percent of the bloc's economic output, or 1 trillion euros ($1.13 trillion) over seven years. "Mr. Trump and his friends believe that climate change is something that has just been invented and its an ideological concept, but ... something dangerous is already...

Climate threat doubter is leading effort to advise Trump
Climate threat doubter is leading effort to advise Trump

The Trump administration is exploring the idea of forming a special committee to look at climate change and security risks, with the effort being coordinated by a 79-year-old physicist who rejects mainstream climate science. A memo to those federal officials asks them to direct any questions to William Happer, a member of Trump's National Security Council and a well-known critic of mainstream climate science findings.

The Cost to Fund the Green New Deal - What You Need to Know
The Cost to Fund the Green New Deal - What You Need to Know

The massive proposal covers energy, jobs and infrastructure.

Swedish teen leaves adults trailing with global school strikes for climate
Swedish teen leaves adults trailing with global school strikes for climate

With that simple plea, 16-year-old Swede Greta Thunberg has inspired children worldwide to boycott classes under the anxious gaze of adults who don't quite know how to react. Every Friday since August, Greta, as she is known to all, has staked out a spot in front of parliament in Stockholm, demanding that her government step up the fight against climate change. In the last six months, tens of thousands of high school students -- in Sydney, Brussels, Berlin, The Hague, London and other cities -- have followed suit.

These climate activists want you to give up hope
These climate activists want you to give up hope

The Extinction Rebellion, a network of climate activists who use civil disobedience to spotlight inaction on global warming, is rooted in the conviction that humanity has dug its own grave and has one foot dangling over the edge. "It is really about waking people up to the fact that this is an emergency situation," said Sara Arnold, a 32-year designer and entrepreneur who has helped to lead campaigns in Britain, including one Sunday disrupting traffic around London Fashion Week. Whether it's time to panic about the threat of runaway global warming may depend less on Earth systems than human ones.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply


Top News: Latin America

Hit "Like"
Don't miss any important news
Thanks, you don't need to show me this anymore.