Republicans have already decided Trump is going to lose Paul Waldman
Come with me to a fantasy land where President Trump and his aides and allies have a sensible view of the political challenge he now confronts.
Between the pandemic and a horrific economic crisis, they realize that Trump cannot be reelected without heroic measures. So not only do they stand up the kind of monumental testing and tracing effort that enabled countries such as South Korea to contain the coronavirus, they also throw everything they can at the economy.
Monthly checks to every family, payroll support to every business, hundreds of billions to prop up state governments crushed by the crisis, a massive new infrastructure plan — whatever it is, they’ll spend it. With interest rates bottomed out and a worldwide flight of capital to secure investments, the United States can borrow money basically for free.
And as every conservative knows, if you’re worried about deficits, you want a thriving economy. Getting that economy back on its feet as quickly and strongly as possible will not only bring down the deficit over the long term, it’s also the only thing that will avoid a political disaster in November. So spend, spend, spend.
In our fantasy land, that’s what every Republican would want to do right now. But it’s not. And the fact that Republicans don’t want to do this raises the possibility that at least some of them are starting to view Trump as a lost cause.
So some White House advisers are getting worried about the deficit again and are contemplating cuts for the near future:
While no one in the administration is advocating immediate cuts, the unease among senior Trump advisers about federal spending comes as the White House halts talks with Congress on additional emergency measures to rescue a U.S. economy facing its worst crisis in generations.
Some White House officials have gone as far as exploring policies such as automatic spending cuts as the economy improves, or prepaying Social Security benefits to workers before they become eligible, although these measures are unlikely to advance given the political stakes, said these officials and advisers, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of internal deliberations.
Despite the urgent need for more action, Republicans are in no hurry to pass another rescue package, leaving it to House Democrats to figure out what the economy needs. What you get from the Republican side is mostly resignation. The government has done what it can, they say, and now we just need to remove the stay-at-home orders and let the economy heal itself.
You can explain Trump’s own lack of interest in more spending by the fact that he has no idea what’s good for him and seems to think that if he puts on a show about how great the economy is doing, he can make it a reality. But other Republicans are not so deluded.
And now with each passing day, the idea that the economy is going to come roaring back in a few months looks less and less plausible. Not only are we nowhere near gaining control of the virus — the only thing that will allow us to “reopen” — but the damage that has already been done will persist for years.
The coronavirus pandemic is too serious to let the president hold freewheeling press briefings in real time, says Post media critic Erik Wemple. (Joshua Carroll, Erik Wemple/The Washington Post) We won’t be able to turn the economy back on like a light switch. There are untold numbers of businesses that can hang on for a few weeks or months after their customers disappeared, but many have already closed their doors or will soon. There are ripple effects across the economy, in sectors such as real estate and energy. We don’t know how long it will be until people feel comfortable flying and going to movies and eating out — but if you think it’ll all happen in the next couple of months, you’re almost certainly fooling yourself.
This is something that Republicans, like everyone else, are coming to understand. So some of them may be looking ahead to when Trump is no longer president.
That means, perhaps above all, resuming the deficit fear-mongering that was such an effective tool to hamstring Barack Obama’s presidency. It also means adjusting their policy and spending agenda to the defensive. They aren’t bothering to talk much about new tax cuts or anything else they’d like to pass. Instead, the focus is shifting to cutbacks and constraints. “Automatic spending cuts as the economy improves” is something a Republican would want only if there’s a Democrat in the White House. It shows that that’s precisely what at least some of them are anticipating.
Meanwhile, Republicans are encouraging and amplifying the still-small movement to defy stay-at-home orders, with all the same deranged rhetoric about “tyranny” that we heard in 2009 when conservatives rose up in rage at Obama. Any work they do now will make it easier to ramp up the new version of the tea party if Joe Biden wins.
The Opinions section is looking for stories of how the coronavirus has affected people of all walks of life. Write to us.
And as for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, he’s nothing if not practical. If you think Trump’s chances of reelection are dwindling, why would you try to save the economy now? Imagine if you passed measures that made the recovery easier but Trump lost anyway. Then Biden wouldn’t have such a hard time, and Republicans getting a huge backlash win in 2022 would be less likely. Better to keep everyone miserable for a couple more years. McConnell can just confirm as many hard-right judges as possible between now and January, and consider his work done.
It’s not that there’s no sincere sentiment underneath the Republican reticence to do too much to save the economy. Republicans are genuinely fearful that people will be too thankful if government helps them too much and that the crisis will make the passage of stronger safety-net programs more likely in the future.
But if you thought Trump could still win, your best move would be to give the economy the biggest short-term boost possible with massive government spending, then worry about cutting it back later. Doing nothing now, even if you’re planning to promote cuts in a year or two, suggests only that you think the Trump presidency is all but a lost cause.
What a nightmare. Forget Covid-19 and just consider what Donald Trump and crew have done to the environment to help their Big Energy friends. Here's a thoroughly grim rundown from the New York Times. Tom
"After three years in office, the Trump administration has dismantled most of the major climate and environmental policies the president promised to undo.
"Calling the rules unnecessary and burdensome to the fossil fuel industry and other businesses, his administration has weakened Obama-era limits on planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from power plants and from cars and trucks, and rolled back many more rules governing clean air, water and toxic chemicals. Several major reversals have been finalized in recent weeks as the country has struggled to contain the spread of the new coronavirus.
"In all, a New York Times analysis, based on research from Harvard Law School, Columbia Law School and other sources, counts more than 60 environmental rules and regulations officially reversed, revoked or otherwise rolled back under Mr. Trump. An additional 34 rollbacks are still in progress.
"With elections looming, the administration has sought to wrap up some of its biggest regulatory priorities quickly, said Hana V. Vizcarra, a staff attorney at Harvard Law School’s Environmental and Energy Law Program. Further delays could leave the new rules vulnerable to reversal under the Congressional Review Act if Democrats are able to retake Congress and the White House in November, she said.
"The bulk of the rollbacks identified by the Times have been carried out by the Environmental Protection Agency, which repealed and replaced the Obama-era emissions rules for power plants and vehicles; weakened protections for more than half the nation's wetlands; and withdrew the legal justification for restricting mercury emissions from power plants.
"At the same time, the Interior Department has worked to open up more land for oil and gas leasing by cutting back protected areas and limiting wildlife protections.
“Over the past three years, we have fulfilled President Trump’s promises to provide certainty for states, tribes, and local governments,” a spokeswoman for the E.P.A. said in a statement to The Times, adding that the agency was “delivering on President Trump’s commitment to return the agency to its core mission: Providing cleaner air, water and land to the American people.”
"But environmental and legal groups said the rollbacks have not served that mission. Ms. Vizcarra, who has tracked environmental rollbacks for Harvard since 2018, said the agency under Mr. Trump has often limited its own power to regulate environmental harm, especially when it comes to climate change.
"Many of the rollbacks have faced legal challenges by states, environmental groups and others, and some could remain mired in court beyond November, regardless of the outcome of the election.
"Hillary Aidun, who tracks deregulation at Columbia University’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, said many of the rollbacks had not been adequately justified, leaving them vulnerable to legal challenge.
"The New York Times analysis identified 10 rules that were initially reversed or suspended but later reinstated, often following lawsuits and other challenges. Other rollbacks were rebuffed by the courts but later revised by the administration and remain in effect.
"All told, the Trump administration’s environmental rollbacks could significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions and lead to thousands of extra deaths from poor air quality each year, according to energy and legal analysts.
"Below, we have summarized each rule that has been targeted for reversal over the past three years."
MEAT PRODUCERS failed to protect their employees and just kept raking in profits.
"Trump, who is in an acrimonious public dispute with Beijing over its handling of the coronavirus outbreak, invoked the 1950 Defense Production Act on April 28 to keep plants open. Now he is facing criticism from some lawmakers, consumers and plant employees for putting workers at risk in part to help ensure China's meat supply. "
ana Winter and Hunter Walker at Yahoo News broke the story that 11 Secret Service agents have tested positive for the coronavirus. Likely some of them served in the West Wing. This week it was revealed at that a US military valet who brought Trump food came down with the virus, sending Trump into a “lava level” rage. Two aides to Vice President Mike Pence have tested positive. Some observers are afraid that the virus is circulating in the West Wing itself.
If so, it would come as no surprise, since the Trump White House has been thumbing its all along nose at best practice mitigating measures.
1. Denialism. Trump spent two months doing absolutely nothing to prepare for fighting the coronavirus, repeatedly denying it would be a problem in the United States, saying there were only 15 cases, that it would fall to zero, that it would magically go away in April. When a scientist at the Centers for Disease Control in late February warned on television of what was coming, the stock market took a dive. Trump had been in India and he fumed all the way home about that public admission. That is, one of Trump’s motives in coronavirus denialism was to protect the value of securities so as to keep his wealthy base happy going into his bid for reelection.
This stance of denialism required that Trump and his circle not be seen to take the coronavirus seriously. But that means that the administration did little to stop the spread of the disease in the White House itself.
2. Shaking hands. Back in the first half of March, Pence defended his and Trump’s insistence on shaking hands. Pence opined, ”As the president has said, in our line of work, you shake hands when someone wants to shake your hand. The president will continue to do it, I’ll continue to do it.”
In contrast, infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci strongly urged that the whole custom of shaking hands be abolished forever. In fact, along with wearing masks, South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan, all of whom have unexpectedly low numbers of cases and fatalities, share in common a culture where you greet people in some other way than transferring someone’s microbes from their hand to yours.
Trump wouldn’t even wear a mask when he toured an Arizona Honeywell factory that makes masks, and where all the employees were wearing them. They were playing Paul McCartney and the Wings’ 1973 James Bond theme song, “Live and Let Die” in the background during his visit. I kid you not.
Will Weissert and Jonathan Lemire at AP reported that Trump fears he would look ridiculous in a mask and that the Biden campaign would use footage of him thus attired in attack ads, hurting his reelection chances.
In Hong Kong universal public voluntary adoption of face masks appears to have been one of their secrets of success in containing the coronavirus. Some Americans, in contrast, are so ignorant that they have actually brandished guns rather than wear a mask. (Since they want to be gunmen, why are the so against wearing a mask? Billy the Kid did).
4. Big Meetings. The intrepid Hunter Walker at Yahoo News also reported that big meetings have been held regularly in the White House, including in the relatively cramped Oval Office. Staff routinely meets in large gatherings with no masks and no social distancing.
5. It is almost as though this Republican administration is full of arrogant people who dismiss science. Oh wait.
There was that op-ed Mike Pence wrote denying that smoking tobacco causes lung cancer, and then there was his refusal to provide clean needles during the HIV crisis, harming Indiana public health. Then there is Trump’s own claim that climate change is a Chinese hoax. Gee, there are a lot of Chinese hoaxes around that all seem actually to come true.
Trump’s chief advisor on making America Minderheitenrein (purified of minorities), Stephen Miller, came up through the far right wing Breitbart propaganda mill that denies the science of climate change. Miller’s wife was one of the Pence aides who contracted the coronavirus this week. I wish Ms. Miller a speedy recovery. It is a nasty disease that can leave even young people with serious health conditions, including decreased lung function and damage to the heart, kidneys and other organs.
People who dismiss the prescriptions of science are prospective Darwin Award winners. The danger is that when they own the White House, they may force the rest of us to join them at the podium for the award ceremony.
Georgia AG Asks Feds to Probe Handling of Ahmaud Arbery Case Emma Tucker, The Daily Beast Tucker writes: "Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr announced on Sunday that he has asked the Department of Justice to investigate the handling of the killing of Ahmaud Arbery, a 25-year-old black man who was fatally shot by two white men while jogging." READ MORE
Darlene Krawetz before contracting Covid-10. (photo: WP)
Cars wait in a queue to receive food assistance provided by the Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida in Orlando on May 7. (photo: Paul Hennessy/Echoes Wire/Barcroft Media/Getty Images)
Karen Ruark, a 3rd grade teacher in Maryland, drives to the South Dorchester School four days a week to access the WiFi there. She often works in her car while her two teenage daughters do schoolwork. (photo: Jaclyn Borowski/Education Week)
Belle Chesler | The Empire Has No Clothes: In the Classroom That Zoom Built Belle Chesler, TomDispatch Chesler writes: "Do you hear that silence? That's the absence of footsteps echoing through our nation's public school hallways. It's the silence of teaching in a virtual space populated with students on mute who lack a physical presence." READ MORE
Two girls play in front of the Sagrada Familia cathedral in Barcelona. (photo: Alejandro GarcÃa/EPA)
The Oil Crash Could Be Geothermal's Big Break Kate Aronoff, The New Republic Aronoff writes: "Geothermal power requires similar infrastructure and skills as fossil fuel extraction, which means laid-off oil workers could switch to greener work pretty easily."
s oil and gas companies falter under the weight of Covid-19 shutdowns, price wars, and their own massive debt burden, an unlikely beneficiary seems to be emerging: geothermal power. Ordinarily, geothermal is the runt of the renewable power litter. But because it uses much of the same infrastructure as is used in fossil fuel extraction, geothermal might offer an appealing off-ramp for some of the tens of thousands laid off in the oil and gas industry, while helping build a low-carbon future.
That said, there’s a long way to go. Geothermal currently provides less than 1 percent of the country’s power, with half of its infrastructure built in the 1980s. Even so, the United States leads the world in installed geothermal capacity. Worldwide resources are distributed widely, from Italy to Mongolia, Turkey to Indonesia; Iceland and Kenya each derive huge percentages of their power from geothermal sources. In the U.S., geothermal extraction points are currently spread across eight Western states.
Geothermal potential here, though, is enormous. The U.S. Geological Survey, in 2008, estimated that geothermal in California could provide up to 15,000 megawatts of power—about a fifth of the current capacity of the state’sexisting power plants. That capacity grows in tandem with technological breakthroughs. A 2019 study from the Department of Energy found that geothermal power has the potential to provide between 16 and 20 percent of the country’s electricity.
Tim Latimer helped found Fervo Energy in 2017 after starting his career as an engineer in the oil industry in Texas. “The skill I had developed to that point was poking deep holes in the ground,” he told me. “What I learned in researching geothermal was that I could do that for no-carbon energy.” Fervo specializes in applying technologies used in natural gas extraction—like hydraulic fracturing and distributed fiber-optic sensing—to geothermal power. “We use all the same equipment” as in natural gas fracking, he says, “but the systems we design with them are quite different.”
The collapse of oil prices in the last several weeks has been a boon to his business. Oilfield service companies, wracked by sweeping layoffs around the country, have been keen to offer Fervo equipment at lower rates than usual, now that there’s less competition from fossil fuel drillers. “As equipment is going into storage, people are really interested in putting that equipment to work,” Latimer said. “We’re getting more interest from service companies and better prices.”
Every member of Fervo’steam got their start in the oil and gas business. “It’s a seamless transition,” Latimer says. “If you’re somebody who knows how to operate that drilling rig and have spent your career learning how to make decisions on the drill site, it’s very easy. We’ll use drilling rigs that may have just come off an oil and gas well. Technically, there are things that have to be different. Our engineers have to learn different things about how the wells work, but from a workforce standpoint, it’s highly similar.”
While still tiny in terms of deployment, and facing geographic limitations, geothermal could be a major complement to renewables, since it’s available around the clock, rain or shine, wind or no wind. Some firms have also explored the possibility of recovering lithium from the superheated brine unearthed in geothermal power production before it’s reinjected underground, potentially producing a critical ingredient in the batteries that store solar power and increase reliability. That’s a serious side benefit, given the great need for lithium going forward, if society is to transition off fossil fuels.
The problems facing geothermal have as much to do with economics as geography. Like fracking, geothermal requires massive upfront capital costs to initiate production. But it’s also more like traditional oil drilling, in that there’s a high risk of drilling up “dry” wells that can’t produce any power. Even amid low interest rates, these factors have made it a hard sell to investors eager for quick returns. And its high production costs translate to higher prices that can make it a less competitive option for power providers compared with wind, solar, or gas.
Policy can make a big difference. California—where about 8 percent of power is produced from geothermal—is set to build the state’s first new geothermal plants in nearly a decade, part of a more general spike of interest in geothermal over the last year. In the Golden State, that growth is being spurred by the state’s climate goals, which aim for carbon neutrality by 2045. The policy signals to investors that natural gas won’t be around forever and makes no-carbon power sources like geothermal more attractive, even if they’re more expensive in the short term. So far, Community Choice Agencies—locally controlled electricity providers in California—have been the most active in procuring power from geothermal.
Like any energy source, geothermal is no panacea. As with wind or large-scale solar installations, geothermal drilling is still drilling, and getting buy-in from surrounding communities will mean undergoing a proper environmental impact review and public comment period, avoiding protected areas, and following careful safety precautions. And since geothermal drilling, like all other activity in our society, existswithin an energy system still run predominately on fossil fuels, the transportation of necessary drilling equipment still runs largely on carbon-based fuels.
The similarities between traditional and geothermal drilling have created an odd coalition in Canada between renewables and oil sands companies. The ultimate goal for fossil fuel companies in Canada isn’t exactly in line with strong environmental goals, of the sort championed here by Green New Deal advocates. The Canadian oil sands companies hope to power their oil sands extraction with geothermal power, a source they view as firmly in line with an “all of the above” approach to energy.
Interest from U.S.-based fossil fuel companies has been comparatively muted, waxing when prospects for incumbent fuels look bleak and waning when they improve again. Despite having been around in some capacity for decades, geothermal in the U.S. remains a relatively small and somewhat undefined industry player. The shape of federal support for domestic geothermal—or the lack thereof—could play a big role in determining whether the industry develops for the benefit of the public or for existing polluters to use as political cover for the continued extraction of dirtier fuels.
If the U.S. were to make decarbonization a national priority, it could shoulder the risk for early-stage geothermal development as it did for upstart technologies during World War II, stimulating private investment. Such a backing could provide not just tax credits and ramped-up research and development, through programs like ARPA-E (the government agency dedicated to promoting advanced energy technologies) but also next-level support like pledging to procure geothermal power for government use. In doing so, the government could also make sure the public benefits from this technology are shared broadly. Federal backing, for example, can ensure that laid-off oilfield workers are hired on geothermal rigs at wages and benefits comparable to those they made digging up fossil fuels. It can also enforce standards on companies receiving federal support for siting, environmental impact assessments, and community input.
All this might sound a little far-fetched at the moment, but given the rapid, in some cases existential, changes underway for fossil fuels, there may now be a bigger opening than ever for newcomers—particularly those that can almost literally pick up where bankrupted oil drillers left off. When they include it at all, green groups tend to treat geothermal as one of several items on a wishlist for the kind of new energy sources that emissions-conscious governments should be investing in; most people simply don’t know much about it. There remain a lot of unknowns about what a massive, thriving U.S. geothermal sector could look like. The Covid-19 crisis could be an opportunity to map one out that’s built firmly in the public interest and align the needs of thousands of laid-off workers with those of the planet.
ana Winter and Hunter Walker at Yahoo News broke the story
s oil and gas companies falter under the weight of Covid-19 shutdowns, price wars, and their own massive debt burden, an unlikely beneficiary seems to be emerging: geothermal power. Ordinarily, geothermal is the runt of the renewable power litter. But because it uses much of the same infrastructure as is used in fossil fuel extraction, geothermal might offer an appealing off-ramp for some of the tens of thousands laid off in the oil and gas industry, while helping build a low-carbon future.
