Bernie Sanders Just Achieved One Final Victory in the Presidential Race

It’s a pretty big win for progressives.

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-328825151/stock-photo-las-vegas-nv-october-cnn-democratic-presidential-debate-features-candidates-sen-bernie.html?src=csl_recent_image-1">Joseph Sohm</a>/Shutterstock


This story originally appeared on Grist and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Pushed left by backers of Sen. Bernie Sanders, Democratic leaders adopted a draft platform over the weekend that commits the party to a more aggressive stance on climate change—more aggressive, in some areas, than the positions of the party’s presumptive nominee.

Appointees of Sanders and Hillary Clinton met in Orlando this weekend to hammer out the party’s policy goals in advance of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia later this month, where the platform will be formally adopted by delegates.

“Democrats believe that carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases should be priced to reflect their negative externalities.”

The negotiating sessions went past midnight and were described by committee members as the most contentious in decades, due to Sanders’ stronger-than-expected showing in the primaries, which resulted in the party giving him unusual influence over the platform. The draft language agreed to Sunday morning includes an endorsement to support “every tool available to reduce emissions now,” which most significantly includes an endorsement for pricing carbon. “Democrats believe that carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases should be priced to reflect their negative externalities, and to accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy and help meet our climate goals,” the draft reads.

A carbon tax was part of Sanders’ big push on climate policy during the primary race, while Clinton has resisted calling for anything that can be misconstrued as a tax hike in an election year.

Putting a price on carbon isn’t controversial policy if you’re talking to an economist. But Clinton has justified keeping its distance by saying climate change “is too important to wait for climate deniers in Congress to pass comprehensive climate legislation,” i.e., a carbon tax.

Clinton will be sticking to that reasoning regardless of what the party platform says. “Her plan is clearly articulated on her website,” Clinton Energy Policy Adviser Trevor Houser said this weekend, according to the Associated Press. “It’s not her plan.” The campaign did not return a request for comment.

That indicates the limited reach of the party platform. Although it’s designed to articulate the positions of the party as a whole, individual politicians—even the party’s standard-bearer—aren’t bound to it. But Sanders has indicated that one of his main goals is to push the party as a whole toward more dramatic action on issues like climate change, and the platform provides the best articulation yet of that direction.

The draft platform hammered out over the weekend includes a few other small nods to Sanders’ climate positions. It marks the official death among Democrats of the once-popular talking point that natural gas can be “a bridge fuel” to renewables. The platform now pits clean energy against gas, by incentivizing wind, solar, and renewables over new natural gas-fired power plants.

The draft also reflects a change in the left’s thinking reflected in President Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline last year, stating that Democrats should “ensure federal actions don’t ‘significantly exacerbate’ global warming” before supporting new infrastructure projects.

Progressive Democrats hardly got everything they wanted, particularly on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, which Obama strongly supports over the objections of many environmentalists, and a nationwide ban on fracking. The platform committee settled on Clinton’s proposal to regulate fracking’s methane emissions and impact on water quality, instead of calling for the Sanders-preferred nationwide ban.

Despite some mixed outcomes, Sanders feels he has won enough in the party’s platform to finally take himself out of the running for the Oval Office. He’s expected to endorse Clinton on Tuesday.

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate