29 Jul 2021 Biden’s “Social Cost” Climate Analysis Flawed
Black Activist Advocates Instead for Analysis of Regulatory Impact on Minorities
Washington, D.C. – Noting that “[i]f the predictions of the environmental ‘experts’ and their models over the course of my life were true, I’d already be dead,” Derrick Hollie of the Project 21 black leadership network asked the Biden Administration to focus on the impact of current regulations rather than speculate about future climate change.
In a response to a White House request for public comment about the social cost of climate change, Hollie blasted the semantics being used by the Administration in its likely pursuit of Green New Deal-style economic and environmental goals:
The hyperbole of a Hollywood-style, world-ending event if I continue to drive an SUV or eat meat is wearing thin, and policymakers know it. That’s why the Biden Administration revived a low-key approach of seeking new regulation based on the “social cost” of greenhouse gas emissions.
According to Hollie, the current proposal recklessly suggests that government try to hit the moving target of “a price tag for ‘the monetized impact to society’ of climate change,” and he recommended it be replaced instead with a “minority impact assessment” that determines the social cost of present-day regulation:
A minority impact assessment would create a list of all the positive and negative impacts a proposed regulation would have on factors including employment, wages, consumer prices and homeownership. This regulatory impact would then be analyzed for its effect on minorities in contrast to the general population.
This deals with the here and now…
This assesses the social costs of climate policy in 2021 rather than 2300. This is a more realistic policy considering the long-term approach is based on models and cannot legitimately factor in what new technologies may be available next year, ten years from now or 100 years from now constituting a complete game-changer in the energy and manufacturing sectors.
The concept of “minority impact assessments” is a popular one, as demonstrated by a April 2021 poll commissioned by Reaching America, a group led by Hollie. That poll showed 72% overall approval for an economic analysis of the impact of new regulations. Among low-income people who consider themselves liberal, support for such an analysis was 75%.
“Keeping regulations from taking away opportunity and squashing prosperity – particularly in at-risk minority areas – should be a priority for the White House when looking at the social costs of its environmental policies,” noted Hollie.
To read Hollie’s entire public comment, which was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, click here.
To schedule an interview with a member of Project 21 on this or other issues, contact Judy Kent at (703) 477-7476.
Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over 25 years, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research. Its members have been quoted, interviewed or published over 40,000 times since the program was created in 1992. Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated, and may be earmarked exclusively for the use of Project 21.
Founded in 1982, the National Center for Public Policy Research is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from some 60,000 individuals, less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations. Sign up for email updates here.
Follow Project 21 on Twitter at @Project21News for general announcements. To be alerted to upcoming media appearances by Project 21 members, follow our media appearances Twitter account at @NCPPRMedia.