Wildly unrealistic is probably an equally appropriate term: The proposal also calls for “upgrading every residential and industrial building for state-of-the-art energy efficiency, comfort and safety.” (I don’t know how many buildings exist in the United States, but there are about 136 million housing units.)
And, for good measure, the proposal throws in a single-payer healthcare system.
A piece in The Wall Street Journal over the weekend pointed out that Congress has had socialist members in the distant past, and that some of the plans considered radical then eventually became mainstream. (Take the minimum wage, for example.)
And while it’s unlikely Ocasio-Cortez’s plan will gain enough steam or wind power to move ahead anytime soon, the climate activist group Sunrise Movement claims that 40 House members support the plan. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who just threw her hat into the 2020 presidential contest, has signaled her support for such an idea.
That means that while the sticks and stones of insulting language—used by Democrats or Republicans—might not break any bones, bad policy can do a lot of damage. Words do matter, and offensive rhetoric should draw criticism, but with the circus of the new Congress and the 2020 elections beginning, it’s important to keep an eye on what both parties are proposing in the middle of the noise.
As a postscript, Rep. Johnson stood by his comments about Trump and the Americans who voted for him. The congressman was more introspective in 2013 when he used an analogy about cage-fighting between “giants and midgets.” The next day, Johnson profusely apologized, saying he had learned that “the m-word is no longer socially acceptable” and he was sorry for using an analogy that some find offensive: “It’s a learning moment for me, and perhaps for many people.”