06x11 - Green New Deal and carbon pricing

[bunniefuu]

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

[Cheers and applause]
John: Welcome, welcome,

welcome to "last week
tonight." I'm John Oliver.

Thank you so much
for joining us.

Just time for a quick
recap of the week,

which has been a busy one,
from Trump imposing tariffs on

Chinese goods to the attorney
general facing off with congress

in a borderline nstitional
crisis you've probably already

forgotten about to this:
Russian president Vladimir putin

tumbled to the ice while taking
a victory lap after playing a

hockey game.

Putin did not see a mat that
had been ld out on the ice.

I feel badly for
whoever put out the carpet.

I feel very badly.

Yeah, I wouldn't
want to be that guy.

John: Yeah,
'cause he's dead now.

That carpet guy is dead.

Probably rolled up
in that same carpet.

Why?

Because putin has people
k*lled and interferes in U.S.

Elections with no consequences.

But still, it was a fuclip
I liked it when he fell.

T inead of focusing on that, we
begin tonight closer to home in

Georgia, the state whose most
famous export is now shorthand

for butts.

And in case you're not
fluent in sex-related emojis,

I'll break it down for
you: A peach means a butt,

an eggplant means a penis,
a taco means a vag*na,

water droplets mean ej*cul*te,
cherries mean testicles,

grapes mean a bun of fferent
testicles stuck together,

a tomato means a butt that's
been spray-painted red,

a baguette means a French penis,
a cucumber means a penis that

has been cut into
slices, and lastly,

a coconut means a coconut,
but one you can f*ck.

Where was I?

Oh, right.

Georgia.

Earlier this ek, their
governor, Brian kemp,

signed a draconian bill which
would ban abortions after a

fetal heartbeat is detected,
which can be as early as six

weeks into a pregnancy, before
many women are even aware

they're pregnant.

And it doesn't stop there.

The bill gives a fetus
natural person status which

allows the fetus to be
entitled to child support,

claimed as a dependent
on tax returns,

and included in
Georgia's population.

Abortions will be allowed
only if a fetus has a fatal

deformity, the mother's
life is endangered,

or in r*pe and incest cases
where a police report was filed.

John: Okay.

Two things here: First, "tax
breaks begin at conception"

might be literally the most
republican law ever created.

And second, it's pretty
egregious to only make an

exception for r*pe or incest
"where a police report was file"

I guess that's to separate the
incest they're talking about

fromour n of the
mill cousin-f*cking.

Or, as it's more commonly known,
"a giuliani marriage." And as if

the bill itself were
not crazy enough,

there were some spectacular
moments in the debate over it,

like this one from
representative Darlene Taylor.

Who speaks for
the baby named fetus?

Who speaks fothe by named fetus?

Well, today I'm going to.

To quote baby fetus, "I
deserve to have the right too.

Some may squirm in their
seats or turn their backs,

but I will speak today."
Baby fetus says, and I quote,

"I have that right.

Don't be afraid or intimidated
about acknowledging me."

John: Okay, let's
walk through this.

First, she explicitly says she's
speaking not on behalf of a

fetus, but on behalf of
baby whose name is fetus.

Then she's somehow quoting
this made-up baby fetus,

despite the fact that
babies can't speak or write,

so she has no source
mateal from which to quote.

I actually think my feelings
on this might be best summed up

baby fetus' seminal 1973
autobiography "all the things I

didn't say because I'm not
real." If I may quote baby

fetus, "a fetus is not a baby.

And, in fact, at six weeks,
a fetus isn't even a fetus.

It's an embryo the size
of a pomegranate seed.

Also, on an unrelated note, I
bet the sex that Jim and Pam

have is fine, but I bet the sex
that Pam and Roy used to have

was better.

This is the hill I would die
on were I not too fictional to

die." that's a direct quote
from baby fetus in 1973.

Now, I should note that this
law won't take effect in Georgia

till 2020 -- if it ever
does, because it's blatantly

unconstitutional.

But Georgia wasn't the only
state considering restrictive

abortion laws this week.

Alabama, the state whose flag
looks like their application to

be a state was rejected, is on
the verge of approving a bill

that would effectively ban most
abortions at every stage of

pregnancy, and doctors who
perform them could be charged

with a felony and face
up to 99 years in prison.

Meanwhile, Ohio -- which
already passed one of the cotry'

strictest abortion laws earlier
this year -- is now considering

putting more restrictions in
women's way: Lawmakers are

considering a bill that
would prohibit most insurance

companies from offering
coverage for abortion services.

It would include dr*gs or
devices used to prevent the

implementation of
a fertilized ovum.

John: So if that bill passes,
even women who do qualify for an

abortion may struggle
to pay for one.

At that point, why stop there?

Why not pass a bill saying, "all
women seeking an abortion in

Ohio must first tie up all the
remaining plot threads on "game

of thrones" in one single
episode of television.

Everyone knows that can't
be done, and frankly,

I feel terrible for any
network stupid enough to try.

Now some opponents have
expressed concern that bill

could also prevent insurance
companies from covering certain

forms of birth control and
contraception -- you know,

the things that help prevent
unwanted pregnancies --

something that
the bill's author,

representative John Becker,
does not seem to have given much

thought.

When we asked where
contraceptives like plan b and

the morning-after pill fall,
Becker said: I don't know

because I'm not smart enough to
know what causes abortions and

what doesn't.

The bill is just written
"if it causes an abortion,

"and people smarter than me
can figure out what that means.

John: Wow.

"I just wrote the bill, someone
smarter than me can figure out

what it means." It seems like
lawmakers should exhibit a

little more awareness of what
they're releasing than the

makers of the "Sonic
the hedgehog" movie.

"Look, I dunno, I just had the
cgi team mock up a furry potato

with a corpse's face.

Someone smarter than me can
figure out if that's nostalgic

for people." And look, I don't
know if the bill written by that

not-smart-enough-man who's
dressed like the devil in a

community theater
play will pass.

I don't know.

It's complete f*cking
nonsense, so I'd hope not,

but you never know.

And if you're sensing a pattern
here, that might be because,

just this year, states have
introduced more than 250 bills

restricting abortion access.

It's pretty clear, with a
conservative supreme court,

lawmakers are taking every shot
they can to get a case that

might end up overturning roe v.

Wade, and they're
going to keep trying.

Which is why it's incumbent on
all of us to pay close attention

so if I may address those
lawmakers in the words of an

unexpectedly literate
baby, "listen,

I'm not a constitutional scholar
-- I'm not anything -- but if I

were, I'd tell you that laws
like these deny women agency

over their own bodies, and your
actions put their health and

lives at risk.

But hey, why not ask the women
affected what they think,

because they're actual
people, unlike me,

a f*cking fictional baby
named fetus." And now this.

Announcer: And now,
excruciating awkward silences

caused by technical
difficulties.

She is traveling with
the president right now.

Caitlyn, what is the white
house saying about this shift?

James, can you hear me?

Cesar, can you hear me?

Gary?

Bruce?

Can you hear me, sir?

[Birds chirping]

Scott.

Well -- [stammers]
How do we stay on track?

Stephanie, can you hear me?

Yes.

Moving on.

Our main story tonight concerns
earth, which, for the record,

is not flat.

Earth is, of
course, cylindrical.

That's why we can both see the
curve of the horizon and fall

off the edge of the planet.

It's just science, everyone.

That's a science fact.

Specifically, we want to talk
about the challenges facing the

environment, and often when
the subject comes up on TV,

the solution is presented as a
bunch of fun recycling ideasike

this: So we're having an
earth day birthday party.

So, check this one out, your
old garden hoses -- do you love

these little baskets?

Oh!

Baskets!

Oh, that's cute.

So easy to make.

No special tools, it's
just a hose and zip ties.

That's it.

Oh, my gosh!

John: Oh, my gosh.

It's weird to see a grown adult
be that excited by some garden

ses ed together with zip ties.

Although I have to admit,
it's pretty f*cking awesome.

I mean, I had this old garden
hose lying around my living room

for ages, and I had no
idea what to do with it.

Now it's a basket I use for
all those picnics I attend!

I love it, and I wish to be
buried with my hose basket.

Unfortunately, fun, crafty tips
like those clearly aren't doing

enough to save our planet.

These days, we're
inundated with new,

terrifying headlines
on a regular basis,

including a landmark report
from the united nations panel on

climate change just last fall
that contained some devastating

conclusions.

The scientists found that
if greenhouse gas emissions

continue at the current rate,
we could start seeing worsening

food shortages and wildfires and
a mass dieoff of coral reefs as

soon as 2040.

John: 2040 -- that's
just 21 years from now!

By that point, Finn
wolfhard will only be 37,

Ariana grande will only be 46,
and Lou dobbs will only have

been dead for 30 years.

So to have any hope of
avoiding those consequences,

the report found that
unprecedented efforts are going

to be required, and to that end,
there's one recent proposal that

gets discussed a lot.

Here are a few of the times it
was mentioned just in the past

week.

She backs the green new deal.

The green new
deal makes no sense.

How do you achieve
the green new deal?

Factor in the new green deal.

Green new deal.

Green new deal.

A green new deal.

Green new deal.

The green n deal.

The green new deal.

The green new deal.

[Crowd booing] John: If you
knew nothing else about the

green new deal, you now know
that everyone's talking about

it, and it was booed at a Trump
rally, therefore it's a, famous,

and b, probably good.

And again, all those
clips were from this week,

which is pretty amazing
considering the fact that the

senate voted the green new
deal down six week ago.

Think about that.

How often do we talk about
legislation after congress votes

it down?

How often do we talk about
legislation before congress

votes it down?

We talk out gislation about as
much as we talked about "suits"

before we knew who
Meghan markle was.

You weren't talking about
"suits." You didn't go to the

water cooler and
say, "hey, Fred,

you catch 'suits'
the other night?

That Harvey specter as portrayed
by Gabriel macht sure is a piece

of work, eh?

On 'suits'?"

On the TV program 'suits' that
has captured my imagination?"

And the green new deal has
been famously polarizing.

On the one hand, all these
senators running for president

co-sponsored it.

On the other hand, Republicans
have been foaming at the mouth

to criticize it for all the
crazy provisions they insist it

he so-called green new deal
proposes the elimination of air

travel.

Eliminating cars,
airplanes, flatulent cows, and,

for good measure, tearing
down all of our buildings.

You can't stop
cows from flatulating,

you gotta eliminate cows, which
means they're comin' after our

hamburgers, congressman.

They want to take
away your hamburgers.

This is what Stalin dreamt
about but never achieved.

John: What are
you talking about?

That's not Stalin's dream.

That is the hamburglar's dream.

You're confusing Stalin
with the hamburglar.

Which is actually
understandable.

One said "the state is an
instrument in the hands of the

ruling class" while the other
said "robble robble." You know,

similar vibes, but you
know, similar vibes,

subtle differences.

So given that the green new deal
is still very much on people's

minds, we thought it'd be worth
taking a look tonight at what it

is, what it isn't,
and most importantly,

where we should
maybe go from here.

And the first thing to
understand is that the green new

deal doesn't even mention the
word "cows" or "airplanes." In

fact, while it's sometimes
discsed ke it's filled with

specific programs to fight
climate change, it isn't.

It's a non-binding resolution
that very briefly sets out some

extremely aggressive goals,
including achieving net-zero

greenhouse gas emissions,
meeting 100% of the country's

power demand through
clean, renewable,

and zero-emission
energy sources,

and creating millions of good,
high-wage jobs in the united

states.

The whole green new deal
is just 14 pages long.

That is 7 seven pages shorter
than the menu for the cheesecake

factory -- a menu
which, by the way,

should have exactly
one thg ont: Pie.

That's right, I said it.

Pie is the only good dessert.

It's got fruit.

It's got bread.

It's got goo.

It is a true triple threat.

f*ck you, cakes.

Pie forever!

I do not yield any ground.

But it's important to note,
the green new deal contains no

specifics on w it will
achieve any of its goals,

which sounds like a criticism,
but it is really not.

The plan's backers, led by
Alexandria ocasio-Cortez,

said repeatedly, right from the
outsetthathe green new deal was

merely meant to kick-start
a conversation -- set some

aggressive targets, so we could
then figure out how to hit them.

Our first step is to define
the problem and define the scope

of the solution, and so
we're here to say that small

incremental policy
solutions are not enough.

John: Right.

At a certain point, your
problems get so big that you

have no choice but
to do methg drastic.

Sometimes you just
get in too deep.

Sometimes you make a
young man's mistake,

like falling in love with the
beautiful wife of a mafioso.

He puts a price on your head,
she swears she'll leave him for

you, but you can't do that,
can't make her live the life of

a fugitive, so you fake your
own death in a falafel cart

collision and sail to America
to start things fresh.

You tell everyone there you
were a comedian in england,

and despite your ridiculous
cartoon accent and no one in

england having ever heard of
you, nobody really questions it.

And it's a kind of
life, I suppose,

eking out a living reading off
stats and jokes once a week on

premium cable, but not a night
goes by you don't dream of the

white sardinian sands and
the soft lips of Isabella.

♪ ♪ Just an example.

Just an example off
the top of my head.

So the green new deal was ant
to be a conversation starter.

But unless you like bad faith
conversations about farting

cows, that conversation
has not gone well so far.

And much of that was
clearly inevitable.

There were people who were never
going to support this plan.

But there were also some
self-inflicted wounds.

The reason you hear hamburgers
come up so much is that aoc's

office mistakenly sent an early
draft of an faq to reporters

containg lguage like "we set a
goal to get to net-zero rather

than zero emissions in ten years
because we aren't sure that

we'll be able to fully get rid
of farting cows and airplanes

that fast," which is clearly
supposed to be a joke,

but it wasn't a great
time to attempt one.

And even aoc admits the rollout
of the green new deal was "the

biggest mistake she's made in
congress." And shs right about

that, because it gave an opening
for these idiots to pretend the

green new deal was all about
hamburger stealing when it is

not.

Although, for the record, there
are real environmental issues

surrounding cattle farming --
among them that cows do emit a

lot of methane, which
is a greenhouse gas.

Although even there, is a
slight although even there,

there's a slight misconception
about which end of the cow is

most responsible.

First, I want to correct a
misnomer that cows don't fart,

they actually belch.

John: It's true.

Most cow methane comes from
them belching, not farting.

And if you only remember one
fact from tonight's show,

please do not let
it be that one.

Please.

Just forget that now.

But while the rollout of this
conversation has been bumpy,

it it is great that the green
new deal has started one.

So let's talk about what a plan
to combat combat change could

look like.

And the first thing
to understand is,

no one solution is going
to be nearly enough here.

We need to tace th
from multiple angles,

and there are lots
of ideas out there,

including building
a better power grid,

improving battery storage,
developing low-carbon jet fuel,

electrifying
industrial processes,

blding cities more
densely, phasing out hfcs,

developing lab-grown meat,
building better nuclear plants,

upgrading our thermostats,
increasing mass transit

ridership, and scaling up
carbon capture technology.

And I could talk
about all of those,

but it would take all night,
and I know you want to watch the

rerun of "game of thrones" so
you can see what garbage from

craft services they've hidden
as an easter egg this week!

There!

Right there!

Those pringles aren't
supposed to be there!

They don't have that type
of pringles in Westeros!

That's ridiculous!

So instead, let's focus on one
policy that you're likely to

hear about as this
conversation continues,

and that's carbon pricing.

The current situation
with carbon is critical.

Carbon emissions are, by far,
the largest source of greenhouse

gases, yet right now, it's
basically free to pollute the

air with carbon dioxide,
which is a little weird.

We've universally
agreed polluting is bad,

and yet it's fr to it.

When you litter, you pay a fine.

When you drive above the
speed limit, you pay a fine.

When you steal 400 hamsters from
petsmart, tie them to a sled,

and race through the
streets on a hamster sleigh,

you pay a fine.

Is that fine worth it?

Yes, of course it is.

But you pay it.

Now, carbon pricing is
a little complicated,

so to break down
the logic behind it,

I've enlisted the help of a
guy who's made a career of

explaining complex ideas
with fun, visual stunts.

Hi, John.

Bill nye the science guy here.

I'm going to explain the
complicated logic behind carbon

pricing.

But rst, safety glasses on.

When something costs more,
people buy less of it.

Safety glasses off.

That's it.

John: That's it?

Oh.

Honestly, I was expecting
something bit re fun and visual

than that, bill.

Could you maybe explain the
long-term impact of carbon

pricing, maybe with a cool stunt
to jazz up what you're saying?

Go on.

Okay, safety glasses on.

When we release carbon -- s, by
burning coal or driving an SUV

-- all of us pay for that, in
the form of things like fires,

floods, and crop failures.

Putting a fee on carbon creates
incentives to emit less carbon.

Incentivizes the development
of low-carbon technology.

Which is huge, because that's
vital to reducing emissions

globally.

And because, for
some reason, John,

you're a 42-year-old man o
needs s attention sustained with

tricks, here's some f*cking
mentos in a bottle of diet coke.

Happy now?

John: Yes, I am happy!

I am happy!

The coke went high!

The mentos made it fizzy!

I love it!

I love it, bill!

I love it!

I love it!

I love it!

But his point about
incentivizing new technology is

important.

Because our current low-carbon
technology strategy is,

essentially, "hope this guy
stops calling people pedophiles

long enough to invent an
affordable electric car." And

right now, the pedophile-to-car
balance is way off.

So, in theory, putting a price
on carbon makes total sense.

And you should know there's
absolutely nothing extreme about

this idea.

Economists across thpolitical
spectrum support it,

and more than 40 governments
worldwide have done it,

including in the u.K., where
carbon pricing has contributed

to co2 emissions falling to
their lowest level since 1890.

That's right.

The lowest level since before
Mary poppins danced with chimney

sweeps and introduced the
banks children to cocaine.

Yes, cocaine.

You thought the spoonful of
sugar was actually sugar?

Come on!

How do you explain
the dancing penguins?

She gave those children cocaine!

And she changed
their lives forever.

Now, there are different ways
to put a price on carbon.

One is cap and trade, where
you cap the total amount of

emissions companies are allowed
to release and let them trade

emsions permits
among themselves.

Or there's the more
straightforward carbon tax,

which just adds a surcharge to
activities that emit carbon.

The problem there is
mostly the word "tax,

"which is a dirty
word in politics.

Just look at what
happened in Canada,

which rolled out a new carbon
tax that went into effect just

last month.

Although it wasn't
easy to do that.

Justin trudeau desperately
tried not to use the word tax,

instead calling it a
"price on pollution,

"and when he slipped up once,
just look how people reacted.

What we are also guaranteeing
is that this tax -- [crowd

shouting] This, uh, price
on carbon will be -- [crowd

Shouting] John: Listen to the
level of excitement over that

slip-up.

If you're a politician, you
just can't say the word "tax,

"in the same way that if you're
an actor you can't say the word

"MacBeth," and if you're the
president of the United States,

you can't say the word
"origins." I hope they now go

and take look at the oranges --
the oranges of thenvestigaon --

the beginnings of
the investigation.

John: It's funny 'cause his
brain is turning into pudding.

Anyway, the int, trudeau
simply saying the word "tax" was

described as "trudeau trips on
his own words." So on one level,

you can kind of understand his
reluctance to use that term,

because it exposed him to
fearmongering about what his

policy would mean
for gular people,

which sometimes took the form
of catchy slam poetry from his

political opponents.

We can't afford
this onerous fee.


a liter of fuel,

taxing me and my ks' school.

Farms and families will feel the
pinch when the carbon tax man

pulls the cinch.

Tax the tractor, combine, plow.

Tax the chicken, egg, and cow.

Carbon tax man, enough's enough.

Don't cat-tax Canadians
on all their stuff.

John: Fire.

Look, I don't care where
you stand on this issue,

no one wants to hear a rhyme
about carbon taxes from anybody,

let alone some guy who looks
like he got his entire wardrobe

at not a fan. Ohn Oliver." But
he is speaking to a real concern

there.

How do y -- now you see it.

Now you can't unsee it.

How do you put a price on carbon
and make things more expensive,

without harming the people
who can least afford it?

And what Canada's doing to
address this is pretty simple:

Very basically, they're taking
the money they collect and

giving it back to
their citizens.

They're doing this by pooling
the money gathered by increased

fees on things like gas
and heat, dividing it up,

and sending it back to
taxpayers as a rebate.

In fact, they've designed it so
that the rebates in Canada are

anticipated to exceed the
increased costs for about 70% of

households, with lowest-income
households seeing the most

benefits from the policy.

Which is great.

But even with that being true,
the fight over a carbon tax was,

and still is,
difficult in Canada.

It's no wonder some politicians
in this country are wary of even

attempting a debate
about carbon pricing.

In fact, the last serious
attempt that got any real

traction was ten years ago,
when congress tried passing a

cap-and-trade bill, and
the debate got so toxic,

West Virginia democrat Joe
manchin was comfortable

expressing his displeasure like
this: I'm Joe manchin and I

approve this ad because I'll
always defend West Virginia.

I sued epa, and I
will take dead aim...

[g*nsh*t] At the
cap-and-trade bill,

'cause it's bad
for West Virginia.

John: Now that may seem
idiotic, because it is,

but in fairness, that is the
only way to stop a bill from

becoming a law.

That bill had a knife!

That bill had a knife!

You all saw it!

You all saw it!

It reached for its pocket.

Look, look, look, I know
this can all seem hopeless,

especially under the
current administration,

but there are actually some
small signs that the tide may be

turning.

The very fact we're still
talking about the green new deal

is really encouraging.

Plus, the percentage of
conservative Republicans who say

they are "very" or "somewhat"
worried by global warming has

more than doubled in
the last five years.

Even Mitch McConnell finally
acknowledged the role of humans

in altering the climate for
the first time a few weeks ago.

And yes, it's a bit like
giving a speech titled,

"alf actually just a big
puppet." I mean, yeah, Mitch,

it's barrsing it's taken
you this long to accept it.

But better late
than never, I guess.

And however bumpy its
rollout was, to its credit,

the green new deal has
succeeded in gettinpeop talking.

But that won't mean anything
unless that talk now turns to

actions.

And putting a price on carbon
could potentially be one of

them.

Although -- let me reiterate --
it won't be enough on its own,

by a long shot.

We're going to need a lot of
different policies working in

tandem and we have to
take action right now.

But you don't have
to take that from me.

Instead, I'm happy to say that
bill nye has agreed to help

drive the urgency home by
actually doing one of his

enjoyable light-hearted
demonstrations.

So, bill -- please -- do you
have a fun experiment for us?

Here, I've got an
experiment for you.

Safety glasses on.

By the end of this century,
if emissions keep rising,

the average temperature on earth
could go up another four to

eight grees.

What I'm saying is, the
planet's on f*cking fire.

There are lots of things
we can do to put it out.

Are any of them free?

No, of course not!

Nothing's free, you idiots!

Grow the f*ck up!

You're not children anymore.

I didn't mind explaining
photosynthesis to you when you

were 12, but you're adults now,
and this is an actual crisis.

Got it safety glasses
off, m*therf*ckers.

John: I think we've
all broken bill nye.

And I, for one, am absolutely
on board with his new,

gritty reboot.

That's our show, thanks
so much for watching.

See you next week.

Good night!

[Cheers and applause]