Is Beto O’Rourke’s $5 Trillion Climate Plan for Real or “Empty Rhetoric”?

“Beto O’Rourke will need to answer why he did not lead on climate change in Congress.”

Stephen Lam/Getty

This story was originally published by HuffPost and is shared here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. 

Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke defended his ambitious proposal to tackle climate change on Monday amid criticism that the $5 trillion plan is overly vague and that his past action to address the growing crisis hadn’t gone far enough.

Speaking with MSNBC‘s Chris Hayes, O’Rourke spoke about the plan he unveiled earlier that day at Yosemite National Park in California. The pitch calls for sweeping new federal policies that would see net-zero emissions by 2050, the re-signing of the Paris Agreement and $5 trillion in spending over 10 years that would go toward investments in clean energy and extreme weather preparation.

“It’s hard to argue that there’s anything more important facing this country, this generation today,” O’Rourke told Hayes on Monday. “This is not caused by God, this is not an act of Mother Nature, this is due to our own emissions, our own excesses and our own inaction in the face of that.” 

Though the proposal is diametrically opposed to the policies of President Donald Trump, it drew some immediate criticism from fellow Democrats.

The 2020 presidential campaign of Washington Gov. Jay Inslee lambasted O’Rourke’s proposal in a statement shortly after it was announced. Inslee is one of 20 Democrats running to unseat Trump but is the only one who has launched a campaign focused solely on climate change.

“Voters have a right to look closely at Democratic candidates’ plans to separate rhetoric from results on climate change,” Inslee’s campaign manager, Aisling Kerins, said in a statement. “We will not defeat climate change with empty rhetoric, borrowed rhetoric, or by taking fossil fuel money. Beto O’Rourke will need to answer why he did not lead on climate change in Congress and why he voted on the side of oil companies to open up offshore drilling.”

The message leveled a direct criticism at Beto’s failed 2018 bid to oust Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), during which he received around $430,000 in donations from employees of the oil and gas industry, according to The New York Times.

Hayes asked O’Rourke several times how he hoped to appeal to voters in his home state of Texas, a major energy producer, and if his policies would mandate phasing out of oil and gas production. O’Rourke sidestepped the questions but said he had no intention of ignoring Republican voters in his quest to address climate change.

“Those who work in the oil and gas industry, those who work in the fossil fuel industry [need to be] brought along as partners to make sure that we make this transition…to make the kind of bold change that we need,” O’Rourke said. He later noted that Democrats had largely ignored rural Republican voters.

“We cannot afford to alienate a significant part of this country. We cannot do this by half measure, or only by half of us,” he said. “We all have a shared interest in a cleaner future in this country.”

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