Animosity toward Climate Policy is part of the reason Climate Change has become a top priority for democratic candidate in the president ial race. It is also the result of increased media coverage, wildfires, a call to action on the Green New Deal, Global Climate strikes, and demands for candidates to formalize their climate and energy plants. The september climate town hall was unprecedented in the seriousness that the candidates and part of the electorate had been addressing the issue. As details emerge on the candidatesplans, a number of questions have emerged. To frack or not to frack . To nuke or not to nuke . To attacks carbon are not to tax carbon or not . The list goes on and on. We have to ask ourselves what the implications of Climate Energy policy is for the economy, for our health and international relations. We gathered a group of speakers from across the political spectrum who have different stakes in this debate on climate and energy. From the Sunrise Movement is lauren, political and legislative coordinator for the Sunrise Movement. She lost her voice and cannot do with us. We are sorry, that would have in another interesting voice here. With that, i want to remind everyone that, todays discussion is on the record streaming live, and it will be archived, so dont say anything your parents or your children would be embarrassed about. You can join the conversation on twitter. You can use the hash tag acenergy. We are hoping for a serious debate between people who are seriously engaged on this topic but do have different viewpoints. We hope some sparks will fly. We will make sure there is a q a portion at the end. We want to make sure those are actual questions and not statements. With that, i turn it over to our moderator at politico to introduce the panelists and get the discussion started. Are right alright. Getting stage direction live. Are you going to be moderating the panel. We have sarah hunt from the rainy center. And a guest on the Atlantic Council. We are just going to get into it. We are just going to get into it because i know that you all have a lot of questions i dont ask. You are all smart people and i want to give you a chance. This is climate and energy in 2020. I will start with christie here to my left. The Green New Deal would require Massive Energy infrastructure. Used to be on the council of environmental quality. So i know that you are game to answer this. Both parties have complained that permitting for Energy Projects takes too long. Can candidates accomplish the Green New Deal infrastructure goals with our current laws . Which clients have a viable plan for dealing with these realities . Thank you. I want to say when you say the Green New Deal, its hard to know what you were talking about. There is a resolution in congress. There is senator sanderss plan. We should be specific and we are talking about plans who has a Green New Deal and which proposal. Your question about permitting and how we will achieve the extraordinary goal every one of the major candidates has laid out, what is consistent across their plans is an embrace of this concept of net zero by the 2050, on by the middle of the century, which is an extraordinarily fast timeline. If you think about what we were looking at during the Obama Administration, we were talking about reducing Carbon Pollution and overall Greenhouse Gases by 20 by thats very significant. 2050. Especially when you look at how to get to the difficult carbonized sectors. How do we build all of this . I believe that is your question regarding permitting. That is a secondary question and something the president will certainly need to address if we are going to achieve any of these goals. It really is about funding the experts and the people who are going to do this work, investing in technology to make sure the permitting process is as stateoftheart as it can possibly be. There is a federal permitting council that is staffed by the trump administration. It has a budget and will be able to collect fees from projects to make sure the Environmental Reviews go quickly. But if you look at what happened to the staff in the agencies that are responsible for conducting these reviews, they have pretty much been decimated. The folks are not there. The budget is not there to actually conduct the work. When you place priorities as a president , you have to find those priorities. If you look at what is happened to the staff and the agencies responsible for conducting these reviews, they have been decimated. The budget is not there to conduct the work. When you place priorities as a president , you have to fund those priorities. That will be the key to how quickly they can go. You are talking about a massive buildout of energy infrastructure. The timelines are realistic . It depends on which one you were talking about. They are not universally the same. Every one of them will require a full approach from an executive and administrative standpoint. What is the responsibility of congress to help change the laws if we cant get there through the existing structure we have right now . Candidates like Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris would prosecute fossil fuel companies for Climate Change. As a representative from the energy industry, what do you make of these calls . What effect might that have on domestic producers, and how are these changes being perceived by the domestic industry . Before i get to that, i want to continue what christie just talked about. We have to make a lot of assumptions. When people run for president , they dont wrong with plans that are they assume that they have legislative a majorities. They make the assumption that congress will be on their side. That is not unique on Climate Change and it is not unique on this democratic primary versus any republican primary or any election we have ever had. It is fair to challenge and say i have the authority to do these things. I think your question is right as far as, if u. S. You todays ledges if you assume todays legislative reality and Legal Framework and regulatory framework. If you did that, you would be comparing apples and oranges. You are assessing a plan that is based on a changed Regulatory Environment and a changed Legal Authority with a reality that is not. So i think it is important to put that into perspective. When it comes to your question, i should start with stating, this is a democratic primary, and a think people are articulating a vision rather than a detailed plan on how do you get from point a to point b . What christie just talked about, changing the vision of 2020, what the goal of 2050 is, is more radical than it sounds an a lot harder to get there. When you talk about the fossil fuel industry, i think the Energy Sector as a whole, is looking at the primary with a much more, through a lens that understands that this is a primary. We will be more interested in seeing what the ultimate nominee says in that debate with President Trump. And i suspect that it will be a nuanced approach compared to where the nominees are now. That doesnt matter if it is senators sanders or warren or former Vice President biden, i think the conversation will be different because you are talking to potential voters at that point. I think the industry does not look at these plans right now as necessarily realistic. We have gone through a change of how the industry views Climate Change from where was just five years ago. It used to be you would go to a fossil fuel energy conference, and they would talk about this silly people talking about Climate Change and how nice it is. At the end of the day, it is 5 . You would get the numbers from 121980, what was the ratio of oil in the energy mix, and it is exactly the same as it is 40 years later those were the favorite talking points you would find at the conference. He would go to renewables and energy, and it would be 2050, we will be there by 2030. If we just had the right tax incentives, the technology will be there. That has changed a bit. I dont think it has changed much on the clean energy side, but i think it has changed more on the Energy Sector where you are seeing fossil Energy Companies becoming huge investors in the clean energy space. Not led by americans, led by europeans. I think there are viewing this debate in the primary as too early to take seriously, and well see what happens later. It will be a heavy dose of skepticism on whether or not these goals are actually attainable. Therefore, lets wait and see and some of this is going to happen, most of this is not going to happen and in the meantime, i need to diversify my portfolio. I think they care more about where shareholder pressure is coming rather than where the Political Landscape in the primary is. I will move on to sarah. You have seen trillions of dollars in federal state and private spending. What do you think about the spending levels envisioned in these plans, and what can we do with the federal first of all, i would like to thank randy for having me here today. Ive been to a lot of these events. This is my first time speaking. Im very excited. In terms of the numbers, i would echo what christie said. There is not a lot of specifics did many of the plans. Its a stab in the dark. I do think its concerning to see these plans that are written as though they were written by no one involved in the process. They have never sat around the Kitchen Table thinking about how were going to make ends meet. A lot of families will still need to afford gas to put in their car. In the democratic primary, we are having these conversations around climate plans that will strike at the heart of the voters they are trying to reach. What i would like to see and i agree, this is a primary contest. We are seeing democrats develop these plans. I dont begrudge them the chance to do that. I hope they are careful. Eventually, they will be smacked with general election politics. If they politicize the issue even more, you see it being wrapped around these conversations in terms of big spending and socialism, legitimate or not, the criticism strikes a fear in certain parts of the electorate. I would hate to see the nominee paint themselves into a corner in the primary and have to walk back a bunch of this later. I care about Climate Change. I have been a climate advocate for three years. I have three nieces and nephew. We need to have a Serious National Conversation about Climate Policy. We have got to be realistic that no matter who is president in 2021, wed to be moving ahead in the energy space in a smart way. Whether its looking at the plans charles has worked on, the Green New Deal. Looking at some of the things that can be done that appealed to people on both sides of the aisle. Regardless of elect oral politics, we need a plan that can win republican votes in the house and senate, even if you have a trifecta for the democrats. We had a democratic house, senate, president , we couldnt pass the big climate bill. I hope the candidates and the party will speak carefully about the low hanging fruit we can go after. Senator Elizabeth Warren talks about her plan. That would be very expensive. Not every middle american in the rust belt was trying to make ends meet can afford a new car. She doesnt talk about the electrifying industry. Very soon, this will be a large part of the tracking industry. We can make sure amazon is running those nice little cranes in their distribution warehouses on electric powered vehicles. Those are things we can do that are low hanging fruit that are easier and more affordable that could be appropriately incentivized through policy. I hope both democrats and republicans will continue to talk about that. There are different investment approaches that range from 1 trillion to 16. 3 trillion. There is a wide range. What has happened with the Green New Deal coming onto the scene the way it has in the past year is the shift in how people think about direct federal spending. Who benefits as result of that spending . There are lots of ways if you look at california who will invest in infrastructure. That is something people can see in their communities now. When we talk about appropriate incentives, each sector is going to be different. When it comes to the Elizabeth Warren plan, she has a green manufacturing plant. She is looking at the appropriate incentives. Some are in favor of carbon taxes, others are not. There are a combination of approaches. Spending is part of the conversation away that it wasnt. I have looked at some of the industrial plans from senator warren. There is a lot of focus on individual people versus the things we can do on a private sector level. What i would say as a conservative, this is my big concern, aside from the money and how we are going to afford it. Someone is going to play for it and its going to be the middle class. They always pay for everything. I dont understand why in this age we are having conversations about expanding the power of the centralized federal government and the executive. There is a phrase you all know. It speaks for itself. In terms of looking at who may or may not win the next election, what that means for Climate Policy, even democrats should be talking about what the states can do and what can be done in the private sector in partnership. I am very concerned about continuing to expand federal power and the power of the president. Let me jump to charles on that. I think he would like to address this as well. Bernie sanders has proposed a green pba to expand Renewable Power. Senator warren has proposed an industrial policy, for mobilization. We are starting to see interest in these big programs. How did these ideas sound outside of the context . The proposals i am seeing from the democratic side are big proposals, ambitious, these are the avenues Many Democrats have been successful talking about and want to work on in the near term. Thank you for the question. Thank you for including me in this panel. This is a timely conversation. One thing that concerns me is its a primary mantra. We have the Green New Deal because an establishment democrat was challenged in the primary and that congresswoman introduced the resolution. We live in an era where candidates are being held to those Campaign Promises in an unprecedented way, to the point that donald trump i dont understand how it is surprising people. All of his promises he made to win the republican primary and soundly defeat a dozen wellestablished mainstream republicans. It should be taken with a grain of sand. The politics have changed. When information can move so quickly. The spending is a big issue. The other thing that observers he is the way that of the Democratic Candidates are talking about Climate Solutions upends the way business has been done for over 100 years in the united state as it relates to the delivery and production of energy. States have primary authority over their energy mixes. Any proposal that asks to do Something Different is likely to see challenges by attorney generals across the United States. When we look at policies that have all of the eggs in one federal basket, we are going to spend our way out, we are concerned on whether the lever of federal investing will crowd in investment or crowd out investment in the Energy Sector. Will these federal policies get tied up in lawsuits . In which case the climate solution is not that actionable that quick because we are taking away power from state and taking away one of the primary avenues we have been for Emissions Reductions in the u. S. Because of federal tax credits and because of state action. Renewable portfolio standards, subsidies, however you want to look at it and we can achieve these midcentury five goals but only we are playing with the. Federal and state. If it is all up to federal we have challenges. I dont think relaxed its a primary policy goal area the is more about how is industry look at it. Industry does not looking at you carefully as far as vision for investments so on. From that perspective i do believe that we will not see much change in talking points, once one of these candidates becomes the nominee i dont think they will walk back any of the proposals that they are presenting today. I want to make sure that was not misunderstood. Whenever they are proposing today will be there position in the general election, maybe even becoming more progressive. There is a way of prioritization that the nuance will change in how this is addressed. That is normal for our policy. I believe the Democratic Party, Climate Change has risen to be the top two, maybe three, in many places number one issue, defining issue in how you evaluate a candidate, not just for president but for any office. The difference is the nuance of what that means in different parts o