SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
With less than a month to go in the election, this past week showed that Republicans up and down the ballot are making their false claims about the Green New Deal and attacks on climate action a centerpiece of their closing argument. A review of publicly available polling data shows that these attacks, as well as attacks on Vice President Joe Biden's plan to build an equitable, clean energy future are falling flat with voters.
WASHINGTON - With less than a month to go in the election, this past week showed that Republicans up and down the ballot are making their false claims about the Green New Deal and attacks on climate action a centerpiece of their closing argument. A review of publicly available polling data shows that these attacks, as well as attacks on Vice President Joe Biden's plan to build an equitable, clean energy future are falling flat with voters.
"Deciding to close the election with false attacks on the Green New Deal and other pro-climate action policies is a big mistake for Republicans," said Climate Power 2020 Executive Director Lori Lodes. "In reality, voters overwhelmingly support bold government action on climate and are more likely to back candidates who support it. In Trump's must-win state of Pennsylvania, for example, data shows a debate over fracking and climate change significantly boosted Biden's standing with voters. Voters see through Republicans' bizarre lies about banning cars, airplanes, and hamburgers, and they are punishing Trump and Republicans for their COVID and climate denial."
A new comprehensive analysis of the Green New Deal and pro-climate policies by Data for Progress found a plurality of voters have a favorable impression of the Green New Deal when asked directly. A plurality of voters also think the Green New Deal is a good idea. Support among Democrats for the policy is more intense than opposition among Republicans; independents are split almost evenly. As Data for Progress concluded, "the policy is not as big of a boogeyman as pundits make it out to be."
Republicans Go On the Attack on the Green New Deal; Democrats Tout Climate, Clean Energy and Conservation
In recent interviews, at events on the campaign trail, and during the presidential and vice-presidential debates, both Trump and Pence have spent considerable time leveling false and misleading attacks on the Green New Deal and other pro-climate policies. For instance, in the 90 minute vice-presidential debate, Pence mentioned the "Green New Deal" 15 times. The attacks are not limited to the top of the ticket. In recent weeks across the Senate battlefield, Republican candidates and outside groups have run anti-Green New Deal ads in Alaska, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Iowa, North Carolina, Maine, and Georgia.
Despite these false attacks, the Real Clear Politics (RCP) average shows Vice President Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris are currently leading in all of the following states: Pennsylvania (+7.1), Ohio (+0.6), Florida (+3.7), Wisconsin (+5.5), North Carolina (+1.4), Michigan (+6.7), Minnesota (+9.4), Iowa (+1.2), Arizona (+2.7), Nevada (+6.0), New Hampshire (+9.0), and Colorado (+10.0).
In addition, the 538 forecast currently predicts a victory for Biden and Harris in Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona, Florida, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nevada, Minnesota, Michigan, Colorado, Maine, and Nebraska's 2nd District.
Pro-climate candidates and outside groups understand climate, clean energy, and conservation are winning issues, and they are making it a key part of their advertising and voter contact strategies in the final month across the Senate battleground.
In the fight for the Senate, 538 predicts a 68% chance of voters returning a pro-climate Democratic majority. In individual races, pro-climate Democrats remain favored to win or be competitive across the battleground. As the New York Times reported, Republicans are on defense and spending tens of millions of dollars in deep-red states such as South Carolina and Kansas.
Climate and Fracking Debate Boosts Biden in Pennsylvania, While Green New Deal Attacks Fall Short
Late August polls conducted by CBS News and Climate Power 2020 and League of Conservation Voters both show the conventional wisdom around fracking is no longer true. The Climate Power 2020 poll found that not only are Pennsylvania voters supportive of climate action and additional regulations on fracking, engaging in a debate around fracking and climate clearly helped Joe Biden, strengthening his favorability rating and increasing his lead over President Donald Trump in the state.
In that survey, Biden led Trump by a margin of 8 percentage points (50%/42%). Notably, that advantage increased to a 15-point lead when the debate was centered around fracking, clean energy, and climate change -- dispelling the conventional belief that a focus on fracking will pull down support for Democrats and Biden in the state.
The messages presented to voters in the survey closely mirror the frequent attacks leveled against Biden's plan for clean energy investments, including negative messaging on the Green New Deal and socialism, and false claims that Biden's plan will cost Pennsylvania 600,000 jobs. You can see the exact language on fracking and the Green New Deal tested in this memo.
Another key finding from the poll was that Keystone State voters, including those in Southwestern Pennsylvania, strongly support bold action on climate change, investments in clean energy infrastructure, and stronger regulations on the fracking industry. By a 61-30 margin, voters in the Pittsburgh DMA support placing stronger regulations on oil and gas fracking, such as increasing the minimum distance between fracking sites and homes and requiring the disclosure of all chemicals used in fracking.
Pennsylvania Voters also overwhelmingly favor two policies that form the foundation of Biden's climate plan:
Battleground Voters Strongly Support Bold Action on Climate
Biden has pledged to achieve 100% clean electricity by 2035. Late September surveys conducted by Data for Progress found strong support for this policy in key presidential and Senate battlegrounds:
Data for Progress surveys conducted in August in Arizona, Iowa, Maine, and North Carolina also found strong support for bold action on climate.
By large margins, voters were more likely to support a candidate backing 100% clean electricity by 2035:
Similarly, voters in these battleground states were also more likely to support a candidate backing $2 trillion in clean energy infrastructure:
When Biden was named and the Republican counterattack was presented, voters still supported the Biden clean energy investment plan by substantial margins:
Climate Power 2020 is putting the Trump administration on defense every single day for ignoring experts, refusing to believe in science, surrendering our government to big oil executives, and gutting public health protections, all at the expense of future generations. The 2020 presidential election is the defining moment for how our nation addresses the climate crisis--our leaders must be emboldened to take immediate action on climate change and to build a just and equitable economy. The time to act is now. Learn more: climatepower2020.org
"If the Constitution doesn't apply to somebody who's lived in this country for 35 years and is a green-card holder... the Constitution doesn't apply to anybody who's been in this country for less time than him," said an attorney representing the scientist.
A permanent U.S. resident has been held in detention for the last week without apparent explanation and without access to legal representation, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
According to the Post, 40-year-old Tae Heung "Will" Kim was detained by immigration officials at the San Francisco International Airport on July 21 after returning from attending his brother's wedding in Korea. In the week since his detention, he has still not been released despite being a green-card holder who has lived in the United States since the age of five.
Eric Lee, an attorney representing Kim, said he has been unable to contact his client and that Kim's only past brush with the law came back in 2011 when he was ordered to perform community service over a minor marijuana possession charge in Texas.
A spokesperson for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seemed to suggest in a statement to the Post that this past instance of marijuana possession was enough justification to detain and deport Kim.
"If a green-card holder is convicted of a drug offense, violating their status, that person is issued a Notice to Appear and CBP coordinates detention space with ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] ERO [Enforcement and Removal Operations]," they said. "This alien is in ICE custody pending removal proceedings."
Lee told the Post that he reached out to CBP to ask whether his client had protections under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the United States Constitution that guarantee rights such as the right to an attorney. In response, the CBP official simply told Lee, "No."
"If the Constitution doesn't apply to somebody who's lived in this country for 35 years and is a green-card holder—and only left the country for a two-week vacation—that means [the government] is basically arguing that the Constitution doesn't apply to anybody who's been in this country for less time than him," Lee said.
Lee added that it would be particularly uncommon for immigration officials to deport his client based solely on a 2011 marijuana possession charge given that Kim had successfully petitioned to seal the offense from his public record after fulfilling his community service requirements. Because of this, Lee said that Kim's case should easily clear the waiver process that allows officials to overlook past minor offenses that could otherwise be used to justify stripping people of their permanent legal resident status.
Prior to his detention, Kim was pursuing a PhD at Texas A&M University, where he was doing research to help develop a vaccine against Lyme disease.
Immigration enforcement officials under the second Trump administration have been particularly aggressive in trying to deport students who are legally in the United States.
Turkish-born Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk was detained for months earlier this year after she was apparently targeted for writing an editorial in her student newspaper critical of the school's refusal to divest from Israel. Russian-born Harvard University scientist Kseniia Petrova, meanwhile, is currently facing deportation after she was charged with allegedly smuggling frog embryos into the United States.
Judge James Boasberg reportedly raised concerns that the Trump administration "would disregard rulings of federal courts," something the White House has done repeatedly.
The Trump Justice Department on Monday filed a misconduct complaint against a federal judge for warning in early March that the president could spark a "constitutional crisis" by defying court orders—a concern that was swiftly validated.
The complaint against James Boasberg, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, was announced by Attorney General Pam Bondi, who alleged on social media that Boasberg made "improper public comments" about President Donald Trump and his administration.
During a March gathering of the Judicial Conference—the federal judiciary's policymaking body—Boasberg reportedly raised colleagues' fears that "the administration would disregard rulings of federal courts leading to a constitutional crisis."
John Roberts, the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, "expressed hope that would not happen and in turn no constitutional crisis would materialize," according to a memo obtained by The Federalist, a right-wing publication.
Days after the Judicial Conference gathering, the Trump administration ignored Boasberg's order to turn around deportation flights, prompting an ACLU attorney to warn, "I think we're getting very close" to a constitutional crisis.
Boasberg, an Obama appointee, later said there was probable cause to hold the Trump administration in contempt of court, concluding that the evidence demonstrated "a willful disregard" for the judge's order.
Boasberg's rulings against the Trump administration in the high-profile deportation case stemming from the president's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act have made the judge a target of the White House and its allies. Trump and some congressional Republicans have demanded that Boasberg be impeached.
Politico reported Monday that the Justice Department's complaint against Boasberg was signed by Chad Mizelle, Bondi's chief of staff.
"Mizelle argued that Boasberg's views expressed at the conference violated the 'presumption of regularity' that courts typically afford to the executive branch," Politico noted. "And the Bondi aide said that the administration has followed all court orders, though several lower courts have found that the administration defied their commands."
A Washington Post analysis published last week estimated that Trump officials have been accused of violating court orders in "a third of the more than 160 lawsuits against the administration."
"The antitrust division has long worked to enforce the law to fight monopoly power, but these attorneys may have been fired for doing just that," said Sen. Amy Klobuchar.
The Trump Justice Department has removed two of its top antitrust officials amid infighting over the handling of merger enforcement, conflict that came to a head with the DOJ's strange and allegedly corrupt settlement with Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks.
CBS News reported that Roger Alford, principal deputy assistant attorney general, and Bill Rinner, deputy assistant attorney general and head of merger enforcement, were fired for "insubordination" on Monday after being placed on administrative leave last week.
"There has been tension over the handling of investigations into T-Mobile, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, and others," the outlet reported, citing unnamed sources.
The Wall Street Journal subsequently reported that the two officials—both deputies of Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater, the head of the DOJ's antitrust division—were terminated "after internal disagreements over how much discretion their division should have to police mergers and other business conduct that threatens competition."
News of Alford and Rinner's firings came amid growing scrutiny of the Justice Department's merger settlement with Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Juniper Networks, an agreement that reportedly divided the DOJ internally.
The Capitol Forum reported last week that Justice Department leaders including Chad Mizelle, Attorney General Pam Bondi's chief of staff, "overruled" top antitrust officials who raised concerns about the settlement, Slater among them. HPE hired lobbyists with ties to the Trump White House to push for the deal, which allowed the merger to move forward pending a judge's review of the settlement.
MLex reported over the weekend that Mizelle placed Alford and Ginner on leave last week following "disagreements with higher-ups over a recent merger settlement in HPE-Juniper."
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who serves on the Senate Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights, called the firings "deeply concerning" and demanded answers from the Trump administration.
"The antitrust division has long worked to enforce the law to fight monopoly power, but these attorneys may have been fired for doing just that," Klobuchar wrote on social media.
Faiz Shakir, an adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), wrote in response to the firings that "more and more people [are] taking notice that Trump is using his power to coddle the oligarchs."
"Major cases being settled, rather than fought out in trials," he wrote. "Nothing new being filed to fight major monopolies. Things like non-compete bans and click-to-cancel rules being overturned."
The American Prospect's David Dayen described the internal turmoil at the Trump DOJ as an apparent "effort to hijack antitrust powers on behalf of large corporations."
"This mess is about more than just a wireless back-office infrastructure merger," Dayen wrote, referring to the HPE-Juniper deal. "The antitrust division is actively overseeing cases against Google, Apple, Visa, Live Nation, RealPage, and more."
"If Slater is functionally not in control of the division, then cash and favor-trading will determine the outcomes for some of the biggest companies in the economy," Dayen added. "We're already seeing lenient enforcement at DOJ, with a deal between T-Mobile and UScellular approved. The precedent appears to be set: The right consultants paid the right amount of money can get you a sweetheart deal."