The New York Times - 19.09.2019

F6 NY THE NEW YORK TIMES, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2019

Earlier this month, the 10 top-polling

Democratic primary candidates took part

in a CNN town hall event on climate

change, the first prime-time televised

forum devoted to the issue in a presiden-

tial campaign.

In perhaps the most significant develop-

ment of that night, nine of the 10 candi-

dates openly embraced the idea of putting

a tax or fee on carbon dioxide pollution.

While most economists agree it is the best

way to cut emissions, it has drawn intense

political opposition, such as from the so-

called yellow-vest protesters in France

last winter, when protests shut down the

Louvre and the Eiffel Tower.

And this year, even as the issue of cli-

mate change gained political prominence,

progressive lawmakers did not include a

carbon tax or price in the Green New

Deal.

Still, recent scientific reports, which

have concluded that the impacts of climate

change — stronger storms, droughts, heat

waves, rising sea levels and flooding —

are already being felt, have also called

more explicitly on governments to re-

spond by pricing carbon.

Polls have shown that rising numbers of

Democratic primary, millennial and inde-

pendent voters see climate change as an

increasingly important issue. But the

political path for the promise of turning

that pledge into legislation remains steep

and tricky. CORAL DAVENPORT

Recommendations

NET ZERO EMISSIONSAlthough the panel

could not reach consensus on how exactly

we would get here, they agreed the federal

government needs to place a limit on

greenhouse gases with the goal of net zero

emissions by no later than 2050, combined

with carbon pricing.

REDIRECT FUNDS IN POSITIVE WAYSA portion

of the revenue from carbon pricing should

go toward underserved and low-income

communities, supporting them in a just

and equitable transition away from fossil

fuels.

Disputes

Members of the panel were divided on

whether trading a carbon tax in exchange

for stripping away regulations would be

the most effective way to lower emissions.

While most members of the panel agreed

with the necessity of a price on carbon in

general, there was little agreement on how

to make a price on carbon palatable to

Republicans and businesses, or even

whether appealing to them is an important

element to consider.

Carbon Pricing

TASK FORCEModerator: Coral Davenport, energy and environmental policy correspondent, The New York Times. Partici-

pants: Vicki Arroyo, executive director, Georgetown Climate Center; Jason Bordoff, founding director of Center on Global

Energy Policy, professor of professional practice in international and public affairs, Columbia University; Carlos Curbelo,

principal, Vocero; United States Representative Ted Deutch, Florida; Rhiana Gunn-Wright, policy director, New Consensus;

Ted Halstead, chief executive and chairman, Climate Leadership Council; Nate Hurst, chief sustainability social impact

officer, HP; Fred Krupp, president, Environmental Defense Fund; Erich Pica, president, Friends of the Earth U.S.; Mary

Powell, chief executive and president, Green Mountain Power; Barry Rabe, professor of public policy, University of Michigan;

Valerie Smith, managing director and global head, corporate sustainability, Citi; William Snape III, senior counsel Center for

Biological Diversity, professor American University Law School; Alison Taylor, chief sustainability officer, Archer Daniels

Midland Company; Daniel Zarrilli, chief climate policy adviser and OneNYC director, New York City Office of the Mayor.

Taxing the rich is having a moment in

American politics, even more than usual.

For decades, Democrats and Republi-

cans in Washington have battled over how

much money the highest-earning Ameri-

cans should send to the federal govern-

ment each year — a fight that has mostly

played out between a few percentage

points of the top marginal rate of income

taxes. President Bill Clinton raised that

rate, George W. Bush lowered it, and

Barack Obama raised it again. President

Trump’s 2017 tax cuts lowered it. It was the

political equivalent of watching two foot-

ball teams push the ball back and forth

between the 40 yard lines.

As the 2020 election approaches, a new

crop of Democratic candidates has opened

a much larger field of play on the issue,

cheered by voters who tell pollsters the

economy is stacked against the working

class and in favor of the rich. Those candi-

dates are looking beyond the income tax —

which many of them would increase for the

rich, to be clear — and offering plans to tax

wealth, investments and a variety of other

hallmarks of the economic top 1 percent.

Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachu-

setts suggests a tax on the 75,000 wealthi-

est American households, as well as a

suite of increased investment and payroll

taxes on high earners. Senator Bernie

Sanders of Vermont wants to increase

significantly the tax rate that heirs must

pay when inheriting large estates, to raise

the top income tax rate above 50 percent

and to increase taxes for businesses and

for wealthy investors who earn money

from dividends and capital gains.

The flurry of proposals are entwined

with questions of economic fairness, mo-

bility and efficiency. JIM TANKERSLEY

Recommendations

CLOSE INHERITANCE LOOPHOLESThe govern-

ment should eliminate the so-called “step-

up in basis” for assets that are passed on

at death, which allows wealthy heirs to

avoid taxes.

INCREASE TAX COMPLIANCEMore funding

should be allocated for tax enforcement to

increase compliance and raise more tax

revenue.

BETTER BENEFITS FOR WORKING FAMILIES

The earned-income tax credit could be

improved and expanded in ways that

increase fairness and mobility.

Disputes

Some members of the panel, including

James Pethokoukis, a fellow at the Ameri-

can Enterprise Institute, viewed the pro-

posal of a wealth tax as simply punitive,

arguing that it targeted the wealthy with-

out accomplishing larger aims like fair-

ness or social mobility. Other members,

including Gene Sperling, a former eco-

nomic adviser to Presidents Obama and

Clinton, argued that this is an important

moment in which the concept of fairness

and economic dignity has become central

to the larger debate around tax reform.

Abigail Disney argued it was wrong for

people like her, who inherit wealth, to pay

lower taxes than people who work for

their income.

Taxing the Wealthy

TASK FORCEModerator:Jim Tankersley, economic and tax policy correspondent, The New York Times. Participants:Lily Batchelder, Frederick I. and Grace Stokes Professor of Law, N.Y.U. Law School; Abigail Disney, filmmaker and activist, Fork Films and Level Forward; John Bryant,

founder, chairman and chief executive, Operation HOPE; Robert Glenn Hubbard, dean emeritus and Russell L. Carson Professor of Economics and Finance and Professor of Economics; Columbia University; Stephanie Kelton, professor of economics and public policy, Stony Brook

University; Jacob Leibenluft, executive vice president for policy, Center for American Progress; Grover Norquist, president, Americans for Tax Reform; James Pethokoukis, DeWitt Wallace Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Kyle Pomerleau, chief economist, Tax Foundation; Steven

Rattner, chairman and chief executive, Willett Advisors; Tiffany Smith, chief tax counsel, Senate Finance Committee; Gene B. Sperling, former national economic adviser, presidents Obama and Clinton; G. Warren Whitaker, partner, Day Pitney; Vanessa Williamson, senior fellow, Brook-

ings Institution; Kathryn Wylde, president and chief executive, Partnership for New York City; Mark Zandi, chief economist, Moody’s Analytics.

WORKING GROUPS

Finding Solutions

At the end of World War I, the airplane,

invented to speed transport, suddenly

looked fearsome. It had been turned into a

weapon of war. It was still a matter of

debate whether the aeroplane, as the

British called it, could cause mass chaos

or threaten entire cities. But that is what

happened a quarter-century later.

The same debate now rages over cyber-

power. Connectivity has changed our lives

and made possible applications we never

dreamed of decades ago — with many

more to come. But we are way past the

moment when the biggest fear is spies

using cyber for espionage, or thieves

draining our bank accounts because we

clicked on the wrong link in a phishing

scam. Cyberattacks can range from elec-

tion interference, to the manipulation of

financial or medical data, to the physical

destruction of equipment, whether nuclear

centrifuges or entire power grids.

A series of ransomware attacks this

summer has proved that for all the talk

about major advances in protecting our-

selves, small towns, school boards and

water districts are wildly vulnerable to

extortion. With a few exceptions, the best

protected have spent tens of millions of

dollars on detection and deterrence.

And now there is another concern: New

high-speed 5G networks will create all

kinds of new applications, but they will also

allow attacks to move much more quickly

and create new vulnerabilities. “We can’t

forget,’’ said Brad Smith, president of

Microsoft, “that every better tool is also a

better weapon.” DAVID E. SANGER

Recommendations

BAN THE TERM “CYBERSECURITY”There are

huge differences between the theft of intel-

lectual property, the breach of a bank ac-

count, a disinformation campaign and a

state-sponsored attack to shut down a

power plant or a missile launch. And pro-

tecting against each attack involves a radi-

cally different approach. Grouping them all

as “cybersecurity” problems makes solving

them harder. Instead, focus on the kind of

problem we are trying to solve and think of

comprehensive ways to approach them —

some of which will involve cyber protec-

tions, but some of which won’t.

NONDIGITAL BACKUPS FOR ELECTIONSSome

functions are too important to trust to the

vulnerabilities of electronic manipulation.

There is no excuse for not having a foren-

sic trail for elections that is nondigital, and

thus not subject to digital attacks. And

these systems need resilience. At a mo-

ment when the government is worried

about “ransomware” attacks on states,

cities and town voter registration data-

bases, make sure the voter rolls are

backed up and printed out.

Disputes

Vast amounts of information about vulner-

abilities is classified by the government —

making it hard to discuss, much less pro-

tect against. Our experts disagreed on

whether there could be a presumption that

vulnerabilities are quickly, if not instantly,

shared. The intelligence agencies fiercely

want to protect their sources and meth-

ods, and the big users of this data say

collecting it is useless if the government is

going to spend weeks or months before

sending up an alert.

Cybersecurity

TASK FORCE Moderator:David Sanger, national security correspondent and senior writer, The New York Times. Participants:Dmitri Alperovitch, chief technology officer and co-founder, CrowdStrike; Neil Chatterjee, chairman, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; Nicole Eagan,
chief executive, Darktrace; Victoria Espinel, president and chief executive, BSA | The Software Alliance; United States Representative Michael Gallagher of Wisconsin; Avril Haines, former deputy director of the C.I.A.; Lorraine Hariton, president and chief executive, Catalyst. Ryan Ma-
cias, owner, RSM Election Solutions; Elizabeth Petrie, managing director, emerging technology risk & analytics, Citi; Neill Sciarrone, co-founder and president, Trinity Cyber; Nick Selby, director of cyber intelligence and investigations, New York City Police Department; Suzanne Spaul-
ding, senior adviser, homeland security, international security program, Center for Strategic and International Studies; Phil Venables, senior adviser of risk and cybersecurity, and board director, Goldman Sachs Bank.

At the DealBook/DC Strategy Forum last week, influential leaders in business, politics and academia gathered to discuss

and debate provocative issues, and provide innovative solutions to some of the nation’s top policy agenda challenges.

Task forces developed recommendations for businesses and policymakers, identifying some central questions that will be

driving conversations through the 2020 election. ILLUSTRATIONS BY KOTRYNA ZUKAUSKAITE