How AOC became even more embarrassing with her Green New Deal
By Rachel Alexander
When Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez burst onto the scene last year, no one expected that she would crash and burn as badly as she has in such a short amount of time. Between her constant gaffes and Valley Girl voice, she has become a real trainwreck for the Democrats. She is the epitome of a young woman who was raised in a privileged environment as daddy’s little princess who can do no wrong. She’s been praised for years for doing nothing, while no one dared stand up to her and tell her she actually is lacking in many areas. Now she thinks she’s a hotshot because she’s one of the youngest members of Congress at age 29.
So not surprisingly, the Green New Deal she proposed in February was so unrealistic not a single Democrat in the Senate voted for it. As President Obama’s legacy became his failed Obamacare, so is Ocasio-Cortez’s legacy becoming her sorry Green New Deal proposal. Embarrassingly, she said the world will end in 12 years if her policy is not adopted. It is based on dubious science, which contends that man-made carbon emissions are destroying the planet. Since many of these proponents have been proven wrong, it seems absurd to spend trillions of dollars to correct a problem that may not exist. But Ocasio-Cortez hasn’t proven to be the sharpest tool in the shed. Having grown up in a privileged environment, she appears unable to grasp the concept of an unaffordable plan.
On her website, Ocasio-Cortez says she considers climate change to be the "single biggest national security threat for the United States and the single biggest threat to worldwide industrialized civilization." This is frightening considering it is dubious science.
Her Green New Deal is named after Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, which introduced new government programs during the Great Depression to stimulate the economy. It ties climate change policy with social justice and inequality. It will cost trillions of dollars in the name of combating climate change. It would increase investments in clean-energy jobs and infrastructure, creating jobs. By 2035, the U.S. energy system would be carbon-free and 100 percent renewable energy. Cars would no longer emit greenhouse gases. Planes would be phased out. All the major areas of the economy would be carbon-free: electricity, manufacturing, buildings, transportation and agriculture. There will be no more farting cows, a goal which has been widely ridiculed.
The Green New Deal would crush the U.S. economy since we are heavily dependent on coal, oil, and gas. It assumes much of the renewable energy would come from nuclear power — but there will be significant public opposition to this. It also includes "universal health care" and "food security." It goes beyond regular welfare, providing “economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work.” There are 15 requirements for “social and economic justice and security.”
In order to pay for her plan, she wants to tax the richest Americans at a rate of 60-70 percent. But that won’t be enough to cover the costs. It would only bring in billions per year, whereas the Green New Deal will cost trillions per year. An analysis from the American Action Forum found that it would cost $93 trillion in the first year. It would more than double the size of the federal government.
Even smaller infrastructure projects have proven unaffordable. California had to drop plans for its plan to build high-speed rail from Los Angeles to San Francisco due to the enormous expense. It was going to cost $77 billion, a drop in the bucket compared to the Green New Deal. California Democratic governor Gavin Newsom admitted that “the project, as currently planned, would cost too much and take too long.”
Ocasio-Cortez has only been in office for three months but she’s already made a fool of herself. And that doesn’t even include the gaffes she made in 2018 before she entered office. For example in November, she referred to the three branches of government incorrectly as the three chambers, and then proceeded to get them wrong: “The presidency, the Senate, and the House.” She is a gaffe-generating gift to Republicans. Despite the Democrats’ efforts to turn her into a star, she is failing miserably. Republicans shouldn’t be afraid of her.
Rachel Alexander and her brother Andrew are co-Editors of Intellectual Conservative. She has been published in the American Spectator, Townhall.com, Fox News, NewsMax, Accuracy in Media, The Americano, ParcBench, Enter Stage Right and other publications.mericano, ParcBench, Enter Stage Right and other publications.