Where do 2020 Democrats stand on the Green New Deal, climate change?

Since the February release of controversial Democratic Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Bernie Sanders', I-Vt., Green New Deal, many 2020 presidential candidates have released their own proposals to tackle the issue of climate change.
The original Green New Deal has been supported by many candidates, including Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas. It has been hailed by the left as a framework for dramatically cutting the United States’ dependence on fossil fuels -- amid a recent report warning of the economic costs climate change would cause in coming years.
But conservatives have slammed the Green New Deal itself, which could cost as much as $93 trillion, or approximately $600,000 per household, according to a new study co-authored by the former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, as an unworkable and enormously expensive scheme.
Which begs the question -- just where do those Democrats with dreams of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue stand on the issue? Do they support the controversial Green New Deal, and what are their own climate platforms?
Here’s what some have come up with so far…

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks during the I Will Vote Fundraising Gala Thursday, June 6, 2019, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/John Bazemore)

The 22-page outline released by former Vice President Biden proposes reaching net-zero carbon emissions and achieving 100 percent clean energy by 2050. It calls for an investment of $1.7 trillion of federal funds over the next 10 years, plus private-sector and state and local investments adding up to more than $5 trillion dollars. The money would be paid partially by undoing President Trump’s tax cuts.
Biden’s plan refers to Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal, after facing criticism from Democratic presidential rivals about his commitment to environmental protection. Biden has repeatedly insisted his stance is not moderate. In a statement, he pledged to “not only recommit the United States to the Paris Agreement on climate change,” but to “go much further.”
Former President Barack Obama had pledged the U.S. would lower its emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.
Biden would design “environmental justice” programs to help the poor and minorities who would face disproportionate economic harm from pollution. Biden also promised to provide retraining and new economic opportunities for coal, oil, gas, and other industrial workers displaced by the decline of the fossil fuel industry.
His most aggressive initiative in the plan is the call to compel other countries—particularly China—to reduce emissions. Biden would aim to combine climate change policy with trade policy using the imposition of “carbon tariffs” on goods imported from heavily polluting economies.
Hours after the rollout, many noted the similarities between Biden’s plan and the plans of other candidates. Republicans reacted by accusing Biden of the same offense that hampered his presidential campaign in 1988. Tweeting from a state visit to the UK, the president weighed in: “Plagiarism charge against Sleepy Joe Biden on his ridiculous Climate Change Plan is a big problem, but the Corrupt Media will save him. His other problem is that he is drawing flies, not people, to his Rallies. Nobody is showing up, I mean nobody. You can’t win without people!”
The campaign, which had no response when asked by Fox News about the Trump tweet, said earlier on Tuesday that it was a mistake: "Several citations, some from sources cited in other parts of the plan, were inadvertently left out of the final version of the 22-page document. As soon as we were made aware of it, we updated to include the proper citations.”

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., waves before speaking during the 2019 California Democratic Party State Organizing Convention in San Francisco, Saturday, June 1, 2019. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

On Tuesday, Warren unveiled a plan to tackle climate change she dubbed the “Green Manufacturing Deal.”
Her plan would pump $2 trillion into green jobs and technology innovations in the United States. It would also eliminate the Department of Commerce and several other smaller agencies.
Warren would pay for her program with proceeds from her proposed new tax on corporate profits and by ending tax subsidies for oil and gas companies. She would also roll back some provisions of the GOP’s 2017 tax law.
The plan is part of a new series of policies Warren will continue to roll out that focus on investing in American jobs and innovation.
The plan is also meant to emphasize Warren's support for reaching the goals of the Green New Deal. Warren released a plan earlier this month on protecting public lands, which would roll back many of the president’s environmental policies, halt offshore drilling, and restore the original boundary lines for two national monuments. 
           

Mayor Pete Buttigieg supports the Green New Deal as well, but has not released his own plan. In May Buttigieg told “Fox News Sunday’s” Chris Wallace, "What the Green New Deal gets right, is it recognizes that there's also an economic opportunity. Retrofitting buildings means a huge amount of jobs for the building trades in this country.” If the U.S. cannot go carbon-free by 2030, he says he supports going net carbon-free. During a town hall on MSNBC on Monday, Buttigieg told Chris Matthews and an inquisitive eighth grader he would call for a carbon tax, building retrofits, better soil management, and a quadrupling of federal funding for energy and research development.

Washington state Governor Jay Inslee speaks during a news conference to announce his decision to seek the Democratic Party's nomination for president in 2020 at A&R Solar in Seattle, Washington, U.S., March 1, 2019. (Reuters)

Last month, Washington State Gov. Jay Inslee released a plan hailed by Ocasio-Cortez as the “gold standard.” It would meet, and even exceed, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change targets for carbon reduction.
The “Evergreen Economy Plan” begins on day one of his administration. By 2030, it aims to reach 100 percent zero emissions from new vehicles, zero carbon pollution from all new commercial and residential buildings and would require total carbon-neutral power across the country.
By 2035, it proposes completely clean, renewable and zero-emission energy nationwide.
In his 38-page proposal, Inslee seeks to accomplish his plan’s goal through tax incentives for using clean technologies, direct government construction, federal funding of private efforts, regulatory mandates, and use of public land and cooperation with private companies.
Additionally, the plan adds more initiatives like green infrastructure and gradual de-carbonization of existing buildings. Inslee promised to raise the minimum wage and protect collective bargaining power for unions, ensure a "just transition" and jobs for workers in the fossil fuel industry, and mandate employers follow guidelines for gender pay parity.
Calling for a $9 trillion investment in green jobs over 10 years, Inslee said his plan would create eight million well-paying jobs for Americans in the transition.
"These folks who have worked in the coal industry are deserving of incredible respect and dignity," Inslee told ABC News.
"They are people whose contributions of multiple generations have literally built the economy of the United States, people who are doing really hard work, and are deserving of our respect and what we've done in the state of Washington, which is to make sure that as we go through this transition, that we also make sure we are caring for and embracing these communities to make sure they have a future as well,” he said.

Former Texas congressman Beto O'Rourke gestures during a campaign stop at Keene State College in Keene, N.H., Tuesday, March 19, 2019. O'Rourke announced last week that he'll seek the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

O’Rourke announced his own four-pillar plan to combat climate change just days before Governor Inslee.
The Texan’s plan labels climate change “the greatest threat we face.” He plans to invest $5 trillion over 10 years in infrastructure and innovation and set a goal to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
His emission reduction goal is also in line with the Green New Deal. According to the proposal, O’Rourke’s mobilization would be “directly leveraged by a fully paid-for $1.5 trillion investment” and the bill he would introduce to Congress would be funded by "changes to the tax code to ensure corporations and the wealthiest among us pay their fair share and that we finally end the tens of billions of dollars of tax breaks currently given to fossil fuel companies.”
O’Rourke also plans to re-enter the Paris agreement on his first day in office and would "set a first-ever, net-zero emissions by 2030 carbon budget for federal lands, stopping new fossil fuel leases, changing royalties to reflect climate costs, and accelerating renewables development and forestation.”

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker speaks during a town hall meeting in Rock Hill, S.C., on Saturday. (AP)

Sen. Booker has released the specifics of what he calls his “environment justice plan.” Booker says the proposal would take "immediate steps" to strengthen the power of the Environmental Protection Agency. During a campaign stop in Columbia, South Carolina, Booker told his crowd: "Right now, under this president, the number of actions that are being taken against polluters has gone dramatically down.”

Mexico Border Patrol Cartoons

Ilhan Omar violated campaign finance rules, probe finds, as more questions about tax filings arise

I'm like Hillary because I can't be touched.

U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has made top headlines for some controversial topics. Here is everything you need to know about her journey from being born in Somalia to becoming a U.S. Representative.

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., repeatedly violated state rules when she used campaign funds to pay for personal out-of-state travel as well as help on her tax returns and must reimburse her former campaign committee nearly $3,500, Minnesota campaign finance officials ruled Thursday.
The Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board said the first-term congresswoman also must pay the state a $500 civil penalty for using campaign money to travel to Florida, where she accepted an honorarium.
"Rep. Omar must personally reimburse the Omar committee $3,469.23," the report concludes. "This reimbursement payment is the total amount of campaign funds that were used for purposes not permitted by statute in 2016 and 2017. Rep. Omar must provide documentation within 30 days from the date of this order showing the deposit of the reimbursement into the Omar committee’s account."
Additionally, conservative commentators pointed out that the Board's report revealed Omar and her current husband, Ahmed Hirsi, filed joint tax returns in 2014 and 2015, when Omar was reportedly married to another man. Omar engaged in a civil marriage with Ahmed Nur Said Elmi in 2009, and the couple separated in 2011 without formally petitioning for divorce until 2017.
Prior to her marriage with Elmi, Omar had reportedly wed Hirsi in the Muslim "faith tradition," but the couple separated shortly afterwards. Omar did not officially marry Hirsi until 2018, after reconciling with him and splitting with Elmi.
Tax experts say the IRS only permits joint filings if a couple is in a state that legally recognizes the couple as married.
"Time to get federal IRS officials involved?" asked conservative blogger Michelle Malkin. "What say you all?"
"A sitting congresswoman may have filed EIGHT YEARS of fraudulent, felonious, tax returns," added writer David Steinberg, who authored a Twitter thread flagging the issue.
'The crisis committee had Frederick & Rosen prepare releases for Rep. Omar and Mr. Hirsi to sign in order for Frederick & Rosen to obtain Rep. Omar’s and Mr. Hirsi’s filed joint tax returns for 2014 and 2015," the report notes. "Frederick & Rosen then reviewed the documents obtained from the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of the Omar committee. However, there is no substantive evidence in the record to show that the services benefitted the Omar committee, and the Omar committee has failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the services from Frederick & Rosen were a permitted noncampaign disbursement under Minnesota Statutes section 211B.12. Rep. Omar must reimburse the committee the $1,500 that was paid to the Kjellberg Law Firm for the services from Frederick & Rosen, Ltd."
That reference to Omar and Hirsi's joint filing, however, was not investigated or addressed further in the report.
The board found that Omar's campaign bought her a plane ticket to Boston, where she spoke at a political rally; paid for a hotel in Washington, D.C., where Omar participated in an interview for the United Nations Foundation's Girl UP conference; and covered her travel to Chicago to accept an award and attend a fundraising luncheon.
Under Minnesota law, campaign trips must be related to serving in office. Omar was a state representative from Minneapolis at the time of the violations. She was elected to the U.S. House last November.
Republican state Rep. Steve Drazkowski initially raised the complaints against Omar, suggesting that she used $2,250 in campaign funds to pay a lawyer for her divorce proceedings. Omar has said those payments to her attorney were campaign-related fees.
The board found the payment was actually reimbursement to two other law firms for work related to immigration and tax documents. The board also determined that $1,500 spent to correct an issue on Omar's tax return was not a campaign-related expense and must be returned.
According to the board, evidence indicates that the $2,250 was not payment for Omar's marital dissolution. The board directed Omar to file an amended report with more information about the law firm payments.
Omar had called the claims politically motivated. In a statement, her congressional campaign said she is "glad this process is complete" and that she intends to comply with the board's findings.
Omar also claimed, "We have been collaborative in this process and are glad the report showed that none of the money was used for personal use, as was initially alleged."
However, the report specifically found that there was "some personal benefit to Rep. Omar from the [legal] services."
Drazkowski said in a statement that the results provide "no reassurance to Minnesotans," and the report "raises even more troubling questions."
Fox News' Sam Dorman and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

CNN’s Don Lemon laments Trump-era ‘toxicity’ and trolls, says he may move on: reports

Can't take the heat?

The news – plus barbs from social media trolls and other critics -- may be too much for CNN’s Don Lemon to bear much longer.
The host of “CNN Tonight” told an audience in New York City on Thursday that the current “level of toxicity” in society – which he attributed to the Trump presidency – has him questioning whether he’ll still be on the air when the 2020 presidential election rolls around, according to reports.
“I don’t know if it’s worth this level of toxicity,” the 53-year-old Lemon said about continuing in his current position, the Daily Beast reported.
“I’m 10 years older than when he rode down the escalator in July 2015,” Lemon added, referring to Donald Trump's campaign announcement four years ago.
Lemon made the remarks at the Financial Times’ “Future of News” conference.
The anchor also spoke about the negative, unsolicited feedback he sometimes receives.
“I was doing a shoot in the park the other day and someone shouted at me, ‘I’m sick of watching you. We built this country. I can’t wait for CNN to fire your black a--, you f----t,'” he recalled, according to Deadline.
“So, all of those sorts of people call you on the phone and say those things, or they write you. I don’t go on social media anymore, it’s so toxic,” he added.
Lemon went on to blame the Trump era, and even the president himself.
“I’m black and gay on cable television in prime time — a unicorn — and I’m a target of the right, a target of white extremists, neo-Nazis and of the president,” Lemon said, according to Deadline.
He added later, “ I wonder how long I will continue to do this particular job,” the Daily Beast reported.
Lemon speculated he might be happier as a celebrity chef, or perhaps doing journalism “in a different way.”

Mexico deploys military to curb migration, reportedly offers major concessions as Trump tariffs loom

Mexican authorities stop a migrant caravan that had earlier crossed the Mexico - Guatemala border, near Metapa, Chiapas state, Mexico, Wednesday, June 5, 2019. (AP Photo/Marco Ugarte)

With just days to go until the Trump administration is set to impose punishing tariffs on Mexico unless the country halts the unprecedented flow of illegal immigrants across the southern border, numerous signs that Mexico would capitulate emerged Thursday -- but it remained unclear Friday morning whether their efforts would satisfy the White House.
Reports in the evening indicated that Mexico's negotiators with Washington have offered to immediately deploy 6,000 National Guard troops to the border with Guatemala. Additionally, Mexico has reportedly agreed to a major overhaul of reasonable asylum protocols, which would require asylum applicants to seek permanent refuge in the first country they arrive in after fleeing their home countries.
For virtually all Central American migrants, that country would not be the United States. The Trump administration has already begun requiring asylum applicants to wait in Mexico while their claims are processed, saying too many applicants were using the system fraudulently to escape into the country. Last month, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request to stop that practice temporarily.
However, two administration officials tell Fox News that while talks have been going well with Mexico, and that Mexico is making some fresh proposals, there is not yet a deal that U.S. officials are sure to imminently accept.
Also on Thursday, Mexico's financial intelligence agency announced it had frozen the bank accounts of 26 people who it claimed "have presumably participated in migrant smuggling and the organization of illegal migrant caravans."
The agency said it had detected money transfers from central Mexico to six Mexican border cities presumably related to the caravans.
Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador insisted on Thursday that the Mexican government does not "act against anybody to please any foreign government."

Mexican authorities stop a migrant caravan that had earlier crossed the Mexico - Guatemala border, near Metapa, Chiapas state, Mexico, Wednesday, June 5, 2019. (AP Photo/Marco Ugarte)

Meanwhile, some 200 Mexican military police, immigration agents and federal police blocked the advance of about 1,000 Central American migrants who were walking north along a southern Mexico highway on Wednesday, once again showing a tougher new stance on attempts to use the country as a stepping-stone to the U.S.
The group of migrants, including many women and children, set out early from Ciudad Hidalgo at the Mexico-Guatemala border and was headed for Tapachula, the principal city in the region. State and local police accompanied the caravan.
The officials blocked the highway near the community of Metapa, about 11 miles from Tapachula.
Unarmed agents wrestled some migrants who resisted to the ground, but the vast majority complied and boarded buses or immigration agency vans. Some migrants fainted and fell to the ground. One young man who collapsed was taken for medical attention.
That afternoon, in Mexico City, police detained Irineo Mujica, the head of migrant aide group Pueblo Sin Fronteras, and Cristobal Sanchez, a migrant activist.
Vice President Mike Pence, monitoring the talks from his travels in Pennsylvania, said the U.S. was "encouraged" by Mexico's latest proposals but, so far, tariffs still were set to take effect Monday.
Trump, in announcing the tariffs last week, promised that they would swiftly increase if no action was taken. The president declared Wednesday evening that "not nearly enough" progress was being made in last-minute negotiations with Mexico.
"On June 10th, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP," Trump said on May 30. "The Tariff will gradually increase until the Illegal Immigration problem is remedied, ... ..at which time the Tariffs will be removed. Details from the White House to follow."
Fox News is told the tariff on all goods by land, sea, and air from Mexico will hike to 10 percent on July 1 -- and potentially increase substantially from there.
"If Mexico still has not taken action to dramatically reduce or eliminate the number of illegal aliens crossing its territory into the United States, Tariffs will be increased to 15 percent on August 1, 2019, to 20 percent on September 1, 2019, and to 25 percent on October 1, 2019," Trump said in a statement released later by the White House on Thursday. "Tariffs will permanently remain at the 25 percent level unless and until Mexico substantially stops the illegal inflow of aliens coming through its territory."
The statement added: "Thousands of innocent lives are taken every year as a result of this lawless chaos.  It must end NOW! ... Mexico’s passive cooperation in allowing this mass incursion constitutes an emergency and extraordinary threat to the national security and economy of the United States."
Specifically, White House sources told Fox News that Mexico would need to step up security efforts on the border, target transnational smugglers, crack down on illicit bus lines and align with the U.S. on a workable asylum policy. Mexico could use certain so-called choke points on the southern border to curb illegal migration sharply, according to the sources.
Arrests along the southern border have skyrocketed in recent months, with border agents making more than 100,000 arrests or denials of entry in March, a 12-year high. Immigration courts that process asylum claims currently have faced a backlog of more than 800,000 cases and asylum applicants increasingly have been staying in the U.S. even after their claims for asylum have been denied.
More than 4,000 individuals have been apprehended at the border with children who are not their own in recent months, administration officials tell Fox News.

FILE - This May 29, 2019 file photo released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shows some of 1,036 migrants who crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, the largest that the Border Patrol says it has ever encountered. (U.S. Customs and Border Protection via AP, File)

And, Customs and Border Protection said it apprehended or turned away over 109,000 migrants attempting to cross the border in April, the second month in a row the number has topped 100,000.
In a dramatic moment, more than 1,000 illegal immigrants were apprehended by border agents near the U.S.-Mexico border last week -- the largest ever group of migrants ever apprehended at a single time, sources told Fox News. The group of 1,036 illegal immigrants found in the El Paso sector included migrants from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, according to sources.
The Trump administration has heavily focused on asylum law reforms, making the current reported Mexican overtures in that area particularly important. Asylum law, conservatives point out, is intended to shield individuals from near-certain death or persecution on account of limited factors like religious or political affiliation — not poor living conditions and economic despair.
Last year, the Justice Department eliminated gang violence and domestic abuse as a possible justification for seeking asylum.
Most asylum applicants are ultimately rejected for having an insufficient or unfounded personalized fear of persecution, following a full hearing of their case before an asylum officer or an immigration judge.
Fox News' John Roberts and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Trump launches blistering attack on 'nasty, vindictive, horrible' Pelosi

President Trump has taken the gloves off in his ongoing feud with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Speaking exclusively to Fox News’ Laura Ingraham in Normandy, France, in an interview that aired Thursday, the president first took time to pay tribute to the heroes who fought on D-Day 75 years ago, describing them as “incredibly brave people” who displayed incredible “valor.”
Then, the president switched gears, slamming Pelosi, D-Calif., as a “nasty, vindictive, horrible person” -- after saying he had “tried to be nice to her.”
“I think she’s a disgrace. I actually don’t think she’s a talented person, I’ve tried to be nice to her because I would have liked to have gotten some deals done,” Trump said on “The Ingraham Angle.”
“She’s incapable of doing deals, she’s a nasty, vindictive, horrible person, the Mueller report came out, it was a disaster for them.”
Trump then referenced former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report, suggesting some Democrats hoped it would give them the so-called silver bullet to take him down.

More from Fox News Flash

“They thought their good friend Bobby Mueller was going to give them a great report and he came out with a report with 13 horrible, angry Democrats who are totally biased against me,” the president told Ingraham.
“A couple of them worked for Hillary Clinton, they then added five more, also Democrats. With all of that, two-and-a-half years, think of it, from before I even got elected, they’ve been going after me and they have nothing.”
Ingraham then asked Trump if he cared whether or not Mueller would testify publicly about his report. The president used the question as another chance to unload on Pelosi.
“Let me tell you, he made such a fool out of himself the last time she -- because what people don’t report is the letter he had to do to straighten out his testimony because his testimony was wrong but Nancy Pelosi, I call her nervous Nancy, Nancy Pelosi doesn’t talk about it,” Trump told Fox News.
“Nancy Pelosi’s a disaster, OK, she’s a disaster and let her do what she wants, you know what? I think they’re in big trouble because when you look at the kind of crimes that were committed, and I don’t need any more evidence, and I guess from what I’m hearing there’s a lot of evidence coming in.
“And then ask Nancy, why is her district [having] drug needles all over the place? It’s the most disgusting thing what she’s allowed to happen to her district, with needles, with drug addicts... with people living on the sidewalk.”
Trump continued, referencing Pelosi’s reported comment to fellow top Democrats that she would like to see him in “prison.”
“It was a horrible, nasty, vicious statement while I’m overseas... She didn’t want to – she is a terrible person and I’ll tell you her name, it’s nervous Nancy because she’s a nervous wreck.”
Pelosi, as Politico reported, made the remark while defending her stance against impeaching the president in an evening meeting with House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., and other top Democrats.
“I don’t want to see him impeached, I want to see him in prison,” she said, according to multiple Democratic sources familiar with the meeting. House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Md., Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., and Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., also reportedly attended the meeting.
Trump also discussed his potential 2020 opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, during his interview with Ingraham.
After being asked about Biden downplaying the potential threat of China to the U.S. at a recent town-hall event, Trump said: “He just doesn't get it, he just doesn't get it.”
“How happy would President Xi be to have Joe Biden be the nominee of the Democratic party,” Ingraham followed up, to which the president replied: “Well he wants him, he wants him.”
Elsewhere during the president’s wide-ranging interview with Ingraham, he said Mueller made “such a fool” out of himself last week when he delivered his first and only public statement about the Russia investigation.
“Let me tell you, he made such a fool out of himself ... because what people don’t report is the letter he had to do to straighten out his testimony because his testimony was wrong,” Trump told Ingraham.
Trump was referring to Mueller’s initial suggestion that the president was not charged with an obstruction-of-justice offense because of longstanding Justice Department policy.
“Charging the president with a crime was not an option we could consider,” Mueller said last week, citing an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion stating that a sitting president could not be indicted.
“If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that. ... We concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime,” Mueller said.
Fox News' Brooke Singman contributed to this report.

Nancy Pelosi Cartoons

'No means no!': Ilhan Omar has bizarre response to 2020 Dem's request to debate AOC

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., rebuked a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate on Wednesday after he defended his offer to debate Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.
"No means no!" Omar said, using the language surrounding consent.
She was responding to former Rep. John Delaney, D-Md., who pushed to debate Ocasio-Cortez after she told him to "sashay away" from the 2020 field, citing his position on "Medicare-for-all"
Delaney appeared to provoke the ire of California Democrats on Saturday when he told the state's Democratic convention that "Medicare-for-all" was bad policy.
“We should have universal health care. We should have universal health care, but it shouldn’t be a kind of health care that kicks 150 million Americans off their health care. That’s not smart policy," Delaney said.
When Ocasio-Cortez, a prominent "Medicare-for-all" supporter, criticized Delaney's statement, he requested a debate with the progressive congresswoman.
Her refusal prompted the response that Omar blasted on Wednesday. "At a minimum, we have to be tolerant of different views on achieving the same goal: universal healthcare," Delaney tweeted, alongside an article about Ocasio-Cortez's refusal.
"That's why I responded to @aoc tweet with a debate offer. This isn't about slogans - people's lives are at stake. We need debates and the truth."
"AOC and Rep Omar are incredibly intelligent women and rising stars inside of the Democratic party. Instead of tweeting at our campaign and taking pot shots, we should be sitting down and talking about the best path forward," said Michael Starr Hopkins, the Delaney campaign's national press secretary. "We’re on the same team. It’s okay to disagree, but refusing to have a substantive conversation helps no one, especially not the Americans who so desperately need us to solve this healthcare crisis."
Delaney, on Wednesday, also lamented the Democratic Party's "intolerance to different ideas." He told Fox News that "Medicare-for-all" made it difficult for Democrats to beat Trump in 2020.
“In the Medicare-for-all bill, it makes private insurance illegal. And there are 150 million Americans who have private insurance and most of them like it," he said.
"And I think the Republicans are not going to be afraid to talk about this and they’re going to pound it over the American people’s heads and make them afraid that the Democrats are going to make them lose their health insurance, and tell them that they’ve got to go on a government website to get their health insurance,”
Their exchange came as 2020 Democrats faced scrutiny over how they would pay for the program as well as whether or not it would kick millions off of their private health insurance plans.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., an ally of Ocasio-Cortez, said at the end of May that he would likely pay for the program with a progressive income tax increase and a payroll tax on employers. The program has been estimated to cost more than $30 trillion, according to two right-leaning think tanks that looked at the issue.
The Trump administration has blasted the proposal as "the biggest threat to the American health care system."
Fox News' Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.