DNC Chair Tom Perez Introduced a Resolution That Could Kill a Climate Debate

The DNC membership has been split on this, and activists are angry.

John Nowak/CNN via Zuma

When members of the Democratic National Committee meet in San Francisco later this month, they will likely consider a resolution introduced by DNC Chair Tom Perez this week that activists say would kill chances of a formal, DNC-sponsored debate devoted to climate change. Since April, the campaign for a climate debate has grown from a far-fetched request from environmentalists and Jay Inslee to scoring endorsements from nearly the entire primary field.

But Perez has been reluctant to hold a climate debate, fearing it would lead to a proliferation of single-issue debates, when there are already a dozen opportunities for candidates to discuss climate in upcoming debates. The DNC membership has been split on this, with dozens of members backing an alternative debate devoted to the climate crisis—which is a competing resolution to Perez’s.

Perez’s “Resolution Recommitting the Democratic Party to the Work of Combating Climate Change and Creating Jobs by Growing Our Clean Energy Economy” was added on Thursday to the docket of proposals to be considered by the DNC’s resolutions committee ahead of an August 22 meeting in San Francisco. While reaffirming Democrats’ commitment to fighting climate change, at the very end of his proposal is a section that suggests the existing debate formats plus the two unofficial climate forums that are already scheduled in September should take the place of a debate:

WHEREAS, Democratic candidates for President of the United States are demonstrating their commitment to tackling the issue of climate change, having already scheduled two televised forums on CNN and MSNBC to discuss the issue, and debating the issue during each of the DNC-sanctioned presidential primary debates; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, Democrats will address the serious threat of climate change through bold and inclusive solutions that grow the clean energy economy and expand America’s middle class.

“This is a resolution discussing the importance of combating climate change,” DNC spokesperson David Bergstein says. “There are multiple other resolutions that address a climate change debate or forum. They’ll all be discussed at the meeting later this month.”

Climate activists, however, say this is Perez’s attempt to end demands for a full debate exclusively devoted to questions surrounding climate change. “DNC Chair Tom Perez submitted a resolution trying to kill the climate debate through backroom dealing,” Varshini Prakash, executive director of the Sunrise Movement, a progressive advocacy group that has been pressuring the DNC to hold a climate debate, said in a statement.

When the DNC resolution committee meets again, they will decide among three resolutions regarding a climate change debate. DNC executive committee member Christine Pelosi, who has supported a competing resolution signed by dozens of members for a climate debate, said the DNC resolutions may change before the meeting in August. That will be hammered out by the DNC’s resolutions committee in coming weeks. Perez “put out a resolution to state his position,” Pelosi says. “It doesn’t change our position… Otherwise we’re going to have this fight out on the DNC floor August 22. I think it’s still possible to figure out a way to compromise.”

MSNBC and CNN have announced forums for September, but debate proponents say forums tend to draw fewer viewers and lack the same level of pressure that having all the candidates onstage at the same time generates. 

“The DNC has a choice to make,” Prakash said. “Will it allow the American public to judge which candidates will take the climate crisis as seriously as science and justice demand? Or will it allow millions of lives and livelihoods to fall by the wayside?”

Here’s the resolution, shared with Mother Jones by a member of the DNC: 

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