77: U.S. Election Special: A New Optimism with Ben Rhodes and Todd Stern

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:06:37] So let's start there because I think that's a great point. I think rejoining the Paris agreement, you know, and what the other world leaders now expect from Biden is a different conversation, which we should get into. But just I mean, domestically, the reality isn't, we're recording this on on Friday afternoon, and it looks pretty clear that Biden has won the presidency, he's taken Pennsylvania and perhaps Georgia. But it also looks equally clear that Mitch McConnell will still be sitting in control of the Senate agenda with a majority of votes. And we know exactly how he treated Obama's agenda in trying to block everything. And we also know that there is now a six-three conservative majority on the Supreme Court. So most presidents, if they wanted to do something and they couldn't go the legislative route, they would go the regulatory route, both of those look difficult. So what options are there would we say? And we're not experts in this, so we won't spend too long on it but I think it's worth drawing out the issues to actually make the kind of progress we need.

Christiana Figueres: [00:07:33] Well, and to that, I would like to add what I just said, right? Popular support. You can eke out some wins if you have popular support. But he doesn't in his case, because the country is fundamentally divided. 

Paul Dickinson: [00:07:50] No, I don't think so.

Christiana Figueres: [00:07:53] OK, convince me, Paul. I'm very open to be convinced.

Paul Dickinson: [00:07:57] I don't think that's the problem. I think the system is dysfunctional and that's causing people to feel like, you know, oh, it's the Republicans. Oh, it's the Democrats. It isn't that. It's the system that's dysfunctional. That's the point.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:08:10] Well, I mean, if that was the case and I don't know if that convinced you or not, I mean, what probably is going to have to happen and I know that Jonathan Pershing, our friend who led the climate negotiations under Obama for the close of his term, has actually said we must not discount the idea that actually, in the end, climate will be a bipartisan effort. And that's probably what's going to have to happen, it's that actually a President Biden is going to have to persuade the country and Republicans that an effort to deal with climate, merge it with infrastructure is about a recovery from covid and a recreation of economic opportunity. Now, that's a hard road to climb, but that's one route back into that.

Christiana Figueres: [00:08:47] I think it's the only.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:08:48] It's the only route back in because all the others are just blocked.

Christiana Figueres: [00:08:51] So, Paul, just as a response to you, I don't think it's the system that's dysfunctional. It's leadership that has been dysfunctional for four years because when leadership is actually pulling people apart as opposed to bringing them together into common ground, such as Tom has just explained, then there is very little space to move forward because you do need to have a broader common ground in the middle. You will always have extremists on the side, but you have to fertilize the promising middle ground that gets things agreed and implemented. And that's not what we have seen in the past four years.

Paul Dickinson: [00:09:35] Sure. But I think that the leadership is really typically a response to a kind of a big constituency. And you've had a big constituency of certain industries, particularly fossil fuel industries, that kind of wanted to make climate change a partisan issue. We've talked about this many times before. Many people on the podcast have talked about, you know, kind of money interfering with the system. And actually, the way to resolve this is for these enormous new companies, the next eras, and all the renewables companies to actually put money into promoting climate change as a central bipartisan issue to counter those dollars so the leaders are on top of the sort of financial coalitions that help shift public opinion.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:10:16] Now, obviously, one of the areas that this is going to have a big impact in, and we indicated this in the beginning, is in the rejoining of the Paris agreement and the U.S. actually re-engaging in the international process to deal with climate. Obviously, the US remains the only country to have announced their withdrawal from Paris. We should also mention this week has contained not only the US election but also the US actually formally withdrawing from Paris, which happened on Wednesday. Now, on Friday, it looks like they'll be back in inside three months. 

Paul Dickinson: [00:10:45] Biden has already said he's going to rejoin us absolutely as soon as he can.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:10:47] Yeah, yeah, yeah he tweeted it. It was brilliant. He said, you know, the US withdrew, 77 days later, we'll be back in. But Christiana, what does that mean? The US rejoining. Because the world is going to want yes, of course, the US to rejoin, but they're also going to want the same thing that every other country is expected to produce, which is a more ambitious nationally determined commitment that would come forward towards the end of next year. So is there going to be a sort of a flush of enthusiasm and relief which we're all feeling and which we should enjoy, but then a sort of sober reality about the fact that although the US can engage and use its diplomacy, that domestic logjam is actually going to mean it's going to be difficult to move the international agenda forward in the way they might like.

Christiana Figueres: [00:11:30] Well, I think it is important to differentiate the procedural rejoining of the Paris agreement from the policies that will be enacted. Because the procedural rejoining, I mean, is fun, but it's no big deal. The true transformation is to go back to the understanding that what we thought ages ago, seems like ages ago, that you always had to choose between economics, profit and people and planet on the other side or divide among the three, that that is no longer the case, that actually you can find common ground among them and that those who are more vested in one or the other have to come together. And the United States will be doing that for sure. Now, they will do two things I think. One is domestically, let's remember that one thing is what the federal government can or cannot do, depending on how tied their hands are. But the other thing is what the states can do and one pressure that will be relieved by the Biden administration is the pressure against states that want to move forward. So the pressure, for example, that California has been putting up with, that will be removed because all of a sudden the federal government will actually be aligned. Same thing with New York, same thing with Massachusetts, all of those states that want to move forward.

Christiana Figueres: [00:12:55] So I think that is going to be probably the space in which you will see more and more active policymaking to put incentives in place for a decarbonized economy will happen at the state level because of the situation at the national level. But what a Biden administration can do at the national or the federal level is reach out to other countries. So I am pretty certain that the first country that they will reach out to is China. Because that is the other largest economy. That's the leader in the developing world. And they are totally the leaders in all of these technologies. So that, I think, will be a very active conversation. That doesn't mean that they will be forgiven for their human rights situation or for unfair commercial relationship with the United States. But let's remember that that had been, the climate conversation, had been sort of corralled and kept in a safe space because it is a vision that now the new Biden administration and the Chinese government actually share. So it's a very important bridge for them to have a more decent and respectful conversation on other issues as well. But I do think that they will hold hands and it could lead to an even more ambitious target setting on the part of China.

Christiana Figueres: [00:14:27] Let's remember that what President Xi Jinping said is that they would be at peak emissions before 2030 and zero net before 2060. Does that mean that now with a Biden administration, they could change those numbers and be much more aggressive on their decarbonization, potentially? The other very interesting move that I'm sure will come very soon after that is a good conversation with India because if you look over to Asia, you have now China, you have Japan, you have Korea aligned on to net-zero by 2050. But India is not there yet. And India is hugely important, has always been to the United States climate change efforts and will be so and has to be treated completely differently and independently from the other countries. So I think the India conversation will also be part of the international priorities of the Biden administration. Plus, I'm sure that there will be a very active reaching out to developing countries, not beyond the emerging countries, to truly developing countries, because basically, the Trump administration turned their back to them. And so I think that will also occur and will be incredibly helpful in the lead up to COP 26. I think, you know, the preparations now and the prospects for COP 26 are fundamentally different than they were just three days ago.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:15:55] And do you think that President Biden would be able to because on my memory of the lead up to COP 21 is that it was the Obama administration's commitment to bilateral climate finance that really brought developing countries to the table with national commitments that changed things? The question is whether Biden would have the latitude and the political will to do something similar, or do you think that the politics have moved on? And that's no longer the thing that makes the difference.

Christiana Figueres: [00:16:22] No, I think finance is still on the table because it hasn't been on the table. It's not visible therefore, it still is a huge discussion. And so what Biden administration might be able to do on bilateral remains to be seen. Obviously, there are possibilities for, at a bilateral level, there are possibilities for debt for climate swaps that are very interesting for Africa because Africa does have international debt. Latin America has mostly domestic debt. And so those bilateral deals are not quite as important for Latin America, but for Africa they can be incredibly helpful. And the other thing that the U.S. could do, of course, is it can definitely change its position in all of the multilateral finance institutions. You know, I mean, you can't change who directs the World Bank or who directs the IDB that are definitely put there by the Trump administration. But the director of the United States at those banks can definitely have a much more helpful position than what we've seen in the past four years and can therefore use the multilateral finance system to also help developing countries.

Paul Dickinson: [00:17:43] So you're saying, Christiana, that we should really, the whole climate change movement, should sort of readjust to be far more ambitious now, really, and kind of use this opening? But a challenging question. I mean, you know, there's this, I mean we've got to remember a kind of very difficult long period is over, which is incredibly exciting.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:18:05] God that feels good to hear you say that.

Paul Dickinson: [00:18:06] Doesn't it feel good? But there was this kind of crazy fascination with Trump. You know, we couldn't keep our eyes off him in a weird kind of way. And I did hear actually, Ben Rhodes say, you know, Obama would tweet about climate change and the media wouldn't cover it. How can we get that? How can we kind of, not in a negative downer way, but in a positive accretive way, a building way, how can we keep media excitement and growing around this kind of new lean forward rather than leaning back?

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:18:37] So, I mean, you know, one thing I would say on that, and I think Biden is actually very well placed to be this person is you know, his message has always been, he's always been the person who supports the unions, who's all about jobs, who stands up for the blue-collar worker. I mean, he's had a long career in the Senate and otherwise where that's been the thing. And he says now someone asks him about climate change, he says, if you ask me about climate change, I think about jobs. And he's actually very good at bringing those messages together. And I think the big hope is actually this is, you know, and he's fully adopted this idea of build back better. If he can bring together the idea that the United States needs to renew itself, needs to recreate its infrastructure, needs to build back from the coronavirus pandemic and the pain of the last four years, and in doing so creates jobs and solving climate change almost becomes a side benefit of that massive infrastructure plan. Then you can really build the momentum and the excitement behind a sort of 21st century America that is looking to the future and looking to recreate itself. That's the exciting narrative.

Paul Dickinson: [00:19:36] And that's the consensus, actually. I mean, Fox News said 70 percent of voters want the government spending more on green energy on election night. Maybe there is a consensus to be found.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:19:45] Now, we're going to talk to Ben Rhodes.

Paul Dickinson: [00:19:48] Exciting.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:19:49] Now, Ben, of course, he's been on the podcast before. He's a good friend of ours. He makes us look like mere children in his approach to podcasting. His podcasts are amazing coming out of CrookedMedia. I'm sure that today is a euphoric day for Ben. So let's give him a ring and hear how it's landing with him. And one thing we should say is that, yes, we have today looked at some of the issues around a Biden presidency and some of the things that will be challenging. But we should also really enjoy today and thank you to the 74 million United States citizens who made a choice today to vote Donald Trump out. It is greatly appreciated by your friends all around the world. This is actually the beginning of a new type of future where we can now come together and deal with these issues. So we look forward to being in that future with you.

Christiana Figueres: [00:20:43] So, Ben, thank you so much for taking a few minutes out of your very, very busy time on this, arguably the most exciting day in recent history, certainly in the past four years.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:20:55] We have had Christiana running around the house screaming at fever pitch for the last few hours. She's only just recently stopped.

Christiana Figueres: [00:21:02] What a roller coaster to get here but here we are. So, Ben, we are very interested in hearing your assessment.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:21:14] Just before we get to that. I'm sorry to interrupt. Can I just also say that CrookedMedia and Ben and colleagues there have kept me saying for the last four years, God bless you for everything you've done in bringing the movement together and getting everything to this point, you guys have been a major part of this. Thank you. Thank you. It's been fantastic.

Christiana Figueres: [00:21:31] And don't let up over the next four years.

Ben Rhodes: [00:21:36] That's the main lesson. The main lesson is that this never ends.

Paul Dickinson: [00:21:42] The struggle without end.

Ben Rhodes: [00:21:44] Yes.

Christiana Figueres: [00:21:45] Where were we, Tom?

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:21:46] Sorry, you were about to say you're curious to know and then I interrupted you.

Christiana Figueres: [00:21:49] Ok, we're very curious to hear your assessment of what a Biden administration can do on climate change because I think, you know, while we're all deliriously happy about the final result, we are disappointed that there is not a clean slate on the Hill for him to work with. And so that really puts a damper in what he could do in regulation, what he could do in terms of the other levers that he could pull. So what do you think is the route toward quick, efficient, high-impact climate policy, given the reality that we have today?

Ben Rhodes: [00:22:35] Yeah, well, first of all, I do want to actually say something about Tom's comment about CrookedMedia that, you know, in addition to podcasts, we have this activist wing and *unintelligible* is a key part of it, Stacey Abrams, we partnered with on Fair Fight Organization. But what I noticed is a lot of the activists who worked, you know, the young people mainly, who worked to support those efforts are also climate activists. These are very overlapping circles. So climate activists and climate voters played a bigger role in this U.S. election than any election in our history and that's worth noting. Christiana, I felt like the Senate results, which is not entirely done yet because of Georgia. So there's an outside chance that the Democrats get to 50 senators in these Georgia special elections that will take place in January. But assuming that that doesn't happen, I think it does lessen the ambition of what you think you might be able to accomplish with Congress. However, it does not in any way erase it. And so I think there's several reasons for optimism that I'll start with. One, the United States will rejoin the Paris agreement that we vacated this week and once again be in the business of global climate leadership and I'll come back to that. Two, obviously, we can once again have a government that believes in science, but also revert back to the Obama era regulatory changes on everything from fuel efficiency to how you regulate emissions.

Christiana Figueres: [00:24:09] You mean roll back the rollbacks, right?

Ben Rhodes: [00:24:12] Rollback the rollback. At least get back to the status quo we had fought to get to at the end of the Obama years and conservation efforts and the rest of it. But then I also do think, third, I do think that in any case and even if we don't take back the Senate, that clean energy and climate is going to be a feature in Joe Biden's first legislative year, in part because whatever stimulus and spending package that he pursues as part of an economic recovery plan from covid is clearly going to feature significant investments in renewable energy and in energy efficiency. And I just think that that would be something that he would negotiate as a deal-breaker, even with a Republican-controlled Senate. So I do think you'll get something ambitious, even legislatively, in addition to regulation, in terms of investments in clean energy and energy efficiency. And then lastly, you know, U.S. leadership internationally on this issue, I think will be at the forefront of the Biden foreign policy and you've seen that in his comments, you've seen that and everybody around him that the idea that this is kind of a secondary or niche issue, that's gone, that this will be embedded in how the United States engages China, how the United States engages Europe, how the United States engages Brazil and every other country in the world that we talked about last time I was on. It's where we were, you know, we weren't, you know, we got there in the last, certainly the second term of the Obama administration, certainly the last two or three years. But I think that that, you know, will now become part of the muscle movements of the US government and there's a lot to be done therefore, to raise the ambition of our national goal under Paris, but also to try to work with other countries to raise their ambition. 

Christiana Figueres: [00:26:01] Everyone else's.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:26:01] So, do you mind if I jump with a question. So I just wanted to pick up on something you just said there, which I think is super fascinating around the fact that the covid recovery is going to have climate baked into it. And that has to be how it happens and I was reading some analysis that sort of said, and I don't know if you'll agree with this, that when the Affordable Care Act came around, the American people didn't quite buy that that piece of legislation was also a recovery from the financial crisis, and that is part of what led to the push back on it. Do you think now that the Biden team kind of will be able to persuade the American people that a package of legislation that includes climate action is also really a recovery from covid and a build back better peice? Do you think that the electorate is in a place now where that can be communicated?

Ben Rhodes: [00:26:46] Yeah, I think so. And I think that look, you know, as someone who considers myself, you know, in my own small way, a climate activist. You could at times be somewhat dispirited by Joe Biden, kind of distancing himself from the Green New Deal and not making the completely robust argument that, you know, the authors of that legislation did. But what he did do that is probably one of the reasons why he won, but also why I think this will be part of the covid recovery is he framed this relentlessly as a job creation that, you know. And by the way, we're in a different situation now than we were a decade ago. There are many more clean energy jobs in this country. It's not hypothetical anymore. I mean, there are far more Americans in Texas employed in the clean energy sector than even in the oil and gas sector and that's Texas. So this is shifting and I think people get that. I think the other thing is, you know, I recall back in 2009 when we came in, the debate around legislation was on cap and trade and the House energy bill, which was, again, kind of viewed and presented as an environmental piece of legislation. I think, therefore, there's been a shift in framing that is constructive in the last decade around economic growth and stimulus that can come through climate action. There's been a much greater awareness, frankly, and mobilization on behalf of climate action. And there's been, I think, you know, astute political framing by Joe Biden that this is a part of how he thinks about his economic plan and job creation. And so I think those factors just create a much more conducive environment this time around than we had in 2009 when the House passed that legislation.

Christiana Figueres: [00:28:36] Ben, here's an obnoxious question. In the middle of all of this optimism and the promise of January and beyond, what do you think the new administration will not be able to do? With respect to where we should be on climate, as science demands it, what are the boundaries of what you think they might be able to do?

Ben Rhodes: [00:28:59] Well, I think one of the things that worries people like me is we don't necessarily even know the boundaries, in part because we don't know how much the work that Trump did and  Mitch McConnell in the courts is going to impact climate action. You now have a six to three conservative majority on the Supreme Court. You've got all these other lower courts that have been packed with pretty far-right judges. And so we don't know if challenges to regulatory action, challenges to EPA action, challenges to what the executive branch of the US government can do will hamstring, you know, a robust climate change agenda. We just don't know. We faced those challenges in the Obama years and it's gotten worse in terms of the makeup of the courts in many ways. So I think that's something that is probably at the forefront of my concerns, along with just what you could get through the United States Senate. Although, like I said, I do think you'll be able to get something through the United States Senate. With the US president moving in this direction again, with the Democrats still having a healthy majority in the House. And, by the way, a majority that is going to be very focused on climate change, given the nature of the House. And, you know, I think with Democratic constituencies expecting action and with state and local governments taking action, philanthropic and private sector folks taking action, like there's a sense of, I think, momentum that is going to come with Biden that, you know, I think is going to move the needle pretty far in the right direction. The question is how much the courts might end up putting up a barrier, a barrier to that.

Paul Dickinson: [00:30:33] You've been so eloquent, Ben, talking about, you know, Citizens United and money kind of infecting politics and making it really difficult to govern and yet it's great to hear you talk about, you know, a new climate, new atmosphere. There's so much sort of citizen engagement. I mean, yes, there's a problem with the courts, but how might this play out differently, you know, over the next four years, how might we or the people listening to this podcast, think about how to frame their activities to sort of take advantage now of this door that's opened?

Ben Rhodes: [00:31:08] I think one of the things that's going to be important on climate change, and it's true of other issues, too, is that you saw very effective mobilization politically in opposition to Trump because Trump was so evidently a danger to the climate. Because of the kind of, you know, completely senseless withdrawal from Paris and the kind of hatchet he took to regulations and, you know, the embrace of coal. I mean, he was a cartoonish version of somebody who's a climate change denier and that got people off their couches and that got people involved. In my experience, frankly, of being in government is sometimes when you're actually in charge, people take their foot off the gas pedal a little bit and the political push to get something done is not as great when you're in charge as when you're out. And so I think the main thing is for people who care about climate, first and foremost, recognizing how much time is wasting here. I mean, frankly, we were out of time. There has to be a sense of urgency in pressuring, by the way, the Biden administration, as well as the opposition to climate action in making sure this is seen as a voting issue in American politics and in making sure that, you know, if people don't like the impact that dark money has had in denying action on climate, then, you know, people with means have to step up and make investments in American politics to move the needle in the other direction. This is all doable. There are more of us than them. There are more people who want to act on this issue. The polls show pretty overwhelmingly Americans get it and want to do something about it. And so we have to resist complacency here that just because the presidency change, that we can trust that the right things will happen. I think people who care about this, whether they're at the community level or whether there are people with voices and means internationally, need to continue to press on it.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:33:10] I think it's such a great point because, I mean, the unity of the left or people, the liberals, has been created by the opposition. And at the moment, when now that goes away, how do we assess priorities, dive in, and do particular things? And of course, you know, I'm so encouraged to hear you say it might be possible to get something through the Senate. It's not just going to be the logjam that you guys experienced when you were in the White House. And we'll see what happens there. I mean, what should people do now that care about climate? And none of the three of us are US citizens, but many of our listeners are. Presumably, there will be a legislative agenda. It's very encouraging that Biden closed on climate in his campaign the last couple of weeks, but, you know better than anybody there are small windows to get legislation through, and those windows are smaller than people realize when they end up getting into government. Do you think climate will be top of the legislative agenda and what can be done now to ensure that that is the case?

Ben Rhodes: [00:34:04] Well, look, I mean, first and foremost, if people are in the United States or particularly in the state of Georgia, control of the Senate is not impossible. And again, I don't raise people's expectations because we haven't won a senate seat in Georgia in a long time and even though Biden won, that doesn't guarantee that these two people running, who are good candidates, are going to get through. But you can obviously support those races in Georgia. I think beyond that, I think there needs to be a sense that on climate change, there's an organized constituency of Americans and American voters and citizens who are going to stick to this in the same way we've seen movements on other issues and that they're going to be calling members of Congress and they're going to be demonstrating in the streets and they're going to be raising money for causes. That essentially the climate movement is kind of a key part of the backdrop of American politics now. And so when they sit, you know, when they sit down to figure out what Biden's first 100 days agenda is, when he sits down to negotiate, if he has to, with Mitch McConnell as Senate majority leader, the idea that clean energy and climate investments can be traded away, is seen as something of a red line, you know, something that Biden can't walk away from in those in those types of negotiations. And so there's that immediate challenge of Georgia but then there's this broader challenge of like how do you make this just a part of the American political dynamic really intensively in the first year of a Biden administration, but then as a permanent presence going forward?

Christiana Figueres: [00:35:50] Because ironically the four years of complete vacuum or rather paddling back has made action now, policy incentives, regulations, legislation all the more urgent. If we had had steady pace along the four years, then we wouldn't have such a buildup of urgency. But now we are really totally up against the wall. So to go back to where we started our conversation with you, no time to let up.

Ben Rhodes: [00:36:24] Yeah, I know. And what you guys actually, you know, you know better than me even is there's been all this innovation during those four years around the world, but also even in the US at the state and local level. So I think as the Biden team kind of moves into, you know, management of the federal government, there should be also kind of lessons learned, too, of if we want to increase our pace of what we can do, can we learn from an American state or what are people doing at municipalities? You know, what are people doing in other parts of the world that is making progress? And so another way to kind of inform the momentum of that first year of a new administration is to make sure that the right models are getting in front of the right people as well.

Paul Dickinson: [00:37:07] Awesome. OK, last question, Ben. You know, you said beautifully that it's a terrible thing, but we can't take our eyes off Trump. I mean, he's been like this kind of siren, I guess, you know, like just screaming at the television. How are we going to be able to keep the energy I mean, not the negative energy, but the positive energy? How are we going to be able to keep a sort of dynamic attention to this critical issue going over the next four years, next eight years, next 100 years?

Ben Rhodes: [00:37:35] Yeah, I think that I mean, you know, first of all, I hate to put it this way because I like to be positive, but part of it is to maintain some negative energy. I mean, the election was a little bit close for comfort for some of us and I think we've all learned that these issues aren't settled. You know, I think we kind of felt like certainly when Barack Obama was re-elected that the idea that, you know, there be another president who kind of denied climate change and, you know, rolled everything back, you know, that we crossed over that hump.

Christiana Figueres: [00:38:08] We thought it was impossible.

Ben Rhodes: [00:38:10] Yeah. And things can swing back and they could swing back in two years in the congressional elections are going to swing back in four years. So I do think, you know, the negative energy people have. 

Paul Dickinson: [00:38:18] Outrage. We call it outrage.

Ben Rhodes: [00:38:20] Yeah, the outrage, you know, this can go back the other direction. And, you know, we've learned that they won't care. They won't pay attention to fires and floods and hurricanes so that is not enough to shake this Republican political leadership out of their complacency. I do think, you know, the polling does show, though, that the American public is moving on this. And then I think, you know, framing what needs to be done affirmatively. And this has been said before, but you guys say this better than anybody, but like, what are the possibilities? America needs a national purpose. America needs a sense of purpose right now. We are adrift. You know, post 9/11, it was supposed to be terrorism, but that's a pretty toxic American purpose, just to fight a war forever against a set of terrorists. And, you know, we need a big goal. We need something big to do as a country. And I think the idea of leading the world.

Christiana Figueres: [00:39:17] A national project.

Ben Rhodes: [00:39:18] Dealing with this existential challenge. It's a national project that people can get behind and everybody's welcome to be part of it and it's going to create jobs and innovation and it's going to lead to new investments in research and technology and development that can, you know, do all kinds of things to make life better for people. I think that kind of positive framing can be important. And then, you know, I think we have to be specific in working with the rest of the world in terms of, you know, OK, we get it. We have a huge credibility gap, we're the people love Paris, but we're willing to put more on the table here. And so then we'll go to China and say, hey, Xi Jinping, we really welcome what you said in the fall, but we're really concerned about the Belt Road initiative and the infrastructure you're building there. And, you know, hey, Brazil, we're really concerned about the Amazon and this is going to affect our bilateral relationship, you know, and on down the line having, you know, tough conversations with other countries. But the conversations that are framed as trying to do something big together, you know, so both at home and abroad. I think this is the issue that, this is the only issue, really out there in the world today where you can, you know, with this collection of nationalists and what have you, there's still, you know, building and broad public consensus that something needs to be done here. And I think that Americans should try to claim that mantle in collaboration and partnership, not as a hegemon, but as a partner with other countries as well as within our own.

Christiana Figueres: [00:40:51] Amen to that. Ben, thank you so much. Thank you for taking time as we said at the beginning, on a very, very hectic, albeit fantastically celebratory day, we should celebrate today and tomorrow and then roll up our sleeves.

Ben Rhodes: [00:41:08] Give ourselves 24 hours here.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:41:13] Good to see you Ben.

Christiana Figueres: [00:41:14] Bye.

Paul Dickinson: [00:41:15] Thank you so much, Ben. Thank you. Greatly appreciate it. 

Ben Rhodes: [00:41:19] Take care guys.

Tom Rivett-Carnac: [00:41:26] So what a great discussion with Ben Rhodes. So grateful to him for coming on on such a busy day. And now, as it is a special day, we have another interview for you. This is Todd Stern, who was the climate envoy for President Obama in the years leading up to and during the Paris agreement and really led the U.S. in the formal negotiation process.

Christiana Figueres: [00:41:53] Todd, thank you so much for taking some minutes on an incredibly exciting and very busy day for everyone. We've been literally screaming, yelling, and jumping on one foot for hours here in expectation of the formal announcement because we're recording this on Friday afternoon. But, Todd, you led the U.S. team into the negotiations of Paris and one, I would say, of your incredibly valuable contributions was the U.S. reaching out bilaterally to China? So I am sure that you have been incredibly frustrated about that over the past four years. Where are we now on that? What can a newly minted Biden administration do to repair the damage done with China and to get back on a positive mutual effort that would take us much farther and much quicker on climate efforts?

Todd Stern: [00:42:56] So a few comments in response to that. And first of all, goes without saying that, that you've got to have China and the U.S. fully engaged in the system for this to work. It also probably goes without saying that the bilateral cooperation that we developed between us, the U.S., and China during the Obama years was, I think, enormously important and consequential with respect to the negotiations over that whole seven-year period that from the time that Obama started until Paris and was certainly a quite important factor. So I am keenly aware of, I worked hard to help try to make that happen, and I'm keenly aware of the importance of it. Having said that, we have to understand that the United States and China are in a very different place right now in terms of the overall relationship. It has deteriorated a lot. And not just because Donald Trump I mean, I'm more than willing to lay all sorts of problems deservedly at his feet. And I don't think that the Trump administration's posture has not been useful. But it is also true that there are serious concerns about Chinese conduct across the broad swath of the US political spectrum from liberal Democrats to conservative Republicans. From my perspective, it will be very important for the Biden administration. And I'm not part of it. I have been part of the campaigns. I can't speak for them and I don't but I think it will be important to try to manage a relationship that will have both competition but also will need to have collaboration as part of it.

Todd Stern: [00:44:59] Those people who want to look at this relationship through the lens of a kind of a new Cold War or an out and out strategic competition which doesn't leave room for collaboration on crucial global issues like pandemics, for example? And like climate change, above all, I think would be making a real mistake, but that's something to be mindful of. Having said that, I think that there are players in the, that definitely, in the Chinese firmament there that are keen on renewing that cooperation. I think there certainly will be on this side as well and it will be important to try to do that for all of the obvious reasons. That China's twenty-seven percent of global emissions and the US is a lot less now, but it's still 13 or 14, and even with the damage of the Trump administration and the withdrawal from the multilateral system in so many ways, I think there's still going to be a great deal of eagerness to have the United States back in the game. I think also wariness, because how could you not be watching from abroad, what's happened here? But I think that there will be that eagerness to have the US back and it'll be important for us to work with the Chinese if it's at all possible.

Christiana Figueres: [00:46:29] I think that will be a global eagerness there. Global eagerness to get the US back. And Todd, beyond China, that clearly, I would say is probably first priority. What other countries, do you think, trickle up to first-tier attention for the Biden administration?

Todd Stern: [00:46:52] Well, I think that, again, I can tell you what I think, and I can't speak for the Biden administration.

Christiana Figueres: [00:47:00] Your opinion, your opinion.

Todd Stern: [00:47:03] My opinion. Look, I think that the sort of crucial starting point is going to be the EU and the EU and UK. You've got to say both of those. I think that.

Christiana Figueres: [00:47:18] As allies.

Todd Stern: [00:47:19] Yes. Nobody is doing more in terms of, nobody gets this and is acting on it, gets the scale and speed at which change is necessary to be on the track for one point five by 2050, net-zero, all of those things better than the EU, both getting it and acting on it. So those things are, that's important. I think the EU will be a critical partner, a traditional partner of the US. There will be a huge amount of relationship, just so much repair work, but just renewal and I think the Europeans will be I'm quite sure thrilled to have an American administration that seeks to be the kind of America that they're used to. I think that there's a whole other group of players, though. I think that it will be, to my way of thinking, very important to reanimate the kind of progressive coalition that took shape under the rubric then, wouldn't be the same rubric now, but back in Paris with what came to be called the High Ambition Coalition. But, and just a step back, because you have to remember what's going on now, the mission of diplomacy is no longer to get an agreement done because we got an agreement done. There is a mission of diplomacy certainly to continue to the sort of the care and tending and development of the Paris regime for sure. But the biggest diplomatic mission, in my view, is to get enough of the big players in the world acting in the transformational way that that will make it possible to meet the Paris goals. And you're not going to meet the Paris goals just by having UNFCCC meetings.

Christiana Figueres: [00:49:02] In a timely fashion.

Todd Stern: [00:49:05] No, no. The scale and speed and the Paris goals in the period between now and 2050. And by the way, 2050. Yes, but that means now and I mean one of the things that I was very, very favorably, very pleased by Xi Jinping is announcement at the UN about essentially net-zero carbon neutrality before 2060. I choose to hear before 2060 is 2051. But the thing that he did not say, that President Xi did not say yet is anything about what's going to happen in this decade and indeed by saying only that they would peak before 2030 that, I mean if before 2030 means 2024, that would be great. If it means December of 2029, that's not so good. And I have heard some things come out of some signals coming from China, which makes it seem as though they have in mind something more like a flat line for the 2020 and then a steep, steep, steep curve down after that.

Todd Stern: [00:50:15] And that's actually not good enough. There's a tremendous amount of coal that they are planning to build both domestically and abroad, and that's a big problem. I didn't mean to go back to China so much, but the point is that the mission, the diplomatic mission is to get as many big players as possible representing as much of the world's emissions as possible really on track. I think the impact of the progressive countries, even if they're small themselves, even if they don't have so much in the way of emissions, is important in terms of providing the kind of political leverage that will be important to push countries in the right direction. Obviously, there's other big players that are big in and of themselves, India, Indonesia, Brazil, places like that. Brazil, by the way, obviously, it's a serious problem what's going on in Brazil right now vis a vis the Amazon, because if you take that too far and we're at risk of it going too far, you cannot get it back.

Christiana Figueres: [00:51:18] And last question, Todd, because it's a very busy day for you today. Do you think that there is enough public understanding and public support for a United States that would reenter into that multilateral space? Or has that multilateral engagement eroded so deeply over the past four years that there would be no public support for the kinds of engagements that you've just described?

Todd Stern: [00:51:51] You're talking about public support in the United States?

Christiana Figueres: [00:51:53] In the United States, yes.

Todd Stern: [00:51:55] Yeah. So this is the situation that we have in the United States right now. With respect to the kind of Democratic Party side of the equation the level of support is higher than it has ever been. The role that climate change played in the Democratic primary part of this campaign was completely unprecedented. I mean people supported climate action for sure in 2016, 2012 whatnot but it was never as much of a campaign issue. This time, along with health care, climate change was one of the two top issues among Democrats. And so I think that you have a big chunk of the public that is still not understanding enough what needs to be done, but much, much, much more with much more engagement and much more kind of determination than we have seen before. On the Republican side, among Trump supporters, not good and actually probably went backwards because of so much rhetoric over the four years listening to him. But if you look at polling on the Republican side, it also divides generationally. So if you're looking at millennials or younger than that, you have not as much enthusiasm or concern as you see on the Democratic side, but it's completely different from the kind of older generations of Republicans. So it's moving in the right direction. It's more powerful than it's ever been with respect to a big chunk of the electorate and I think that going in the right direction and so to your question, is there enough support to re-engage multilaterally? Absolutely. I mean I think that there was tremendous support for Paris when we got it done. And I think we and everybody else are living through their own version of the California fires, those storms and droughts and floods, and all the rest that we're seeing and it's bad here. And so I think that that the last two things concern me, but the lack of public support for international engagement does not concern me.

Christiana Figueres: [00:54:15] Thank heavens. I'm so glad you put that very clearly. Todd, thank you so much for, again, belatedly, but I've thanked you many times. Thank you for everything you did to help us to get to the Paris agreement. And for the patience that you have exercised during these four years and in advance, I am sure that the Biden administration will be reaching out to you for wise counsel and deep experience so thank you in advance for for guiding them.

Paul Dickinson: [00:54:45] Thanks, Todd. Bye.

Todd Stern: [00:54:46] Ok, bye-bye.

Clay Carnill: [00:54:52] Hey everyone, it's Clay back in Detroit. What an absolute privilege to get a few minutes with Todd Stern. You know, it's so incredible and very refreshing to hear his optimism surrounding public support for global collaboration on climate change. And I know in particular these past four years have felt very isolating for us here in the US. But as we see everything unfolding in front of us regarding the election, it really feels like we're on a new path and it's really exciting. So we're going to celebrate and then we're going to get to work, OK, at the end of every episode we have on an incredible musical guest for you. And this week, it's MF Tomlinson. The song he's about to play is called Sum of Nothing and when we asked him about writing the song, he said, one day I read in the paper about there being 50 years left until climate change made much of the earth inhospitable and it all clicked for me. I wanted to write a song about the way we live, striving for a better future while simultaneously erasing it. And when we asked him about what is the role for artists in the climate crisis, he actually took the time to promote this incredible project called Feat, f e a t, that's in Australia. And it gives artists a chance to invest money from their touring into buying ownership stakes in solar farms and also to build infrastructure for new solar farms. They can invest anywhere from five dollars to five hundred thousand dollars and MF Tomlinson says it's a truly exceptional example of musicians doing something incredible to make a difference in this crisis. Examples like this show generally we probably have more of a role to play as people than as artists. However, some good art is always a plus. So here it is, some good art, performing live for Outrage and Optimism. This is MF Tomlinson with Sum of Nothing. Enjoy

Clay Carnill: [01:00:28] So there you go. Another episode of Outrage and Optimism. The track you just heard was Sum of Nothing by MF Tomlinson and I keep saying this after every song, you have to go see the music video. There's some dolly zoom shots, you know, like Wes Anderson meets Robert Clowes meets Stanley Kubrick, you know, those type of zoom shots. It's a really fun, fast-paced escape from linear box-type thinking. You just got to see it. He also zips on a Tangerine LaCroix, which is the most underrated flavor of carbonated waters. That's a hot take. Links to check out the music video and check out more of his music and Feat, f e a t, the musician-funded solar panel project, all in the show notes. Check it. Ok, the credits. Outrage and Optimism is a global optimism production executive produced by Marina Mansilla-Hermann and produced by Clay Carnill. From Detroit to Bonn, Global Optimism is Sara Lau, Katie Bradford, Lara Richardson, Sophie McDonald, Freya Newman, Sarah Thomas, Sharon Johnson, and John Ward, and our hosts are Christiana Figueres, Tom Rivett-Carnac, and Paul Dickinson. Special thanks this week to Namita Uberoy for making our interview with Ben Rhodes possible. And thank you to our guests Ben Rhodes and Todd Stern. So if you're like me and you're up at 2 AM, 3:30 AM, 5 AM, 5:01 AM checking the election results, you should look us up @globaloptimism on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. And if you're enjoying the podcast, it means everything if you could read us five stars and write us a review, we read every single one that comes through. So thank you. OK, a new chapter is ahead. We've got another episode coming your way next week. Hit Subscribe right now so you don't miss it. We'll see you then.