New York State’s radical green-energy agenda has been destined for failure since the moment it was conceived. In its earliest stages, progressive supporters of the bill refused to put firm cost estimates on the plan to overhaul New York’s energy grid. The resulting 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) was rammed into law, despite calls for a more measured approach by Republican lawmakers. 

Considering how the CLCPA was created, it’s not surprising to see a new report from Public Power New York indicating New York will not be hitting clean-energy targets by 2030 (https://www.fingerlakesdailynews.com/regional-state-congressional/report-new-york-wont-meet-its-2030-climate-goals). It’s even less surprising to see concerns coming from the business community, which recognizes the astronomical fiscal strain the CLCPA presents in its current form — retrofitting buildings and eliminating existing affordable-energy options are unworkable. To that end, the Business Council has issued warnings about the plan due to its costs, unreliability, and impact on economic growth (https://www.bcnys.org/news/business-council-new-york-state-announces-statewide-campaign-urge-albany-create-and-implement).

Concerns about this plan are coming from every angle: the business community, the rate-paying public, and legislators from all levels of government have sounded the alarm here. The enormity and scope of the interest groups worried about this plan tell you everything you need to know about its chances of success.

There are significant concerns that rushing this transition is not only going to be costly, but also deadly. A failing power grid during extreme hot or cold weather could prove fatal, and some estimates expect as much as a 10 percent shortage during weather emergencies. How will we compensate for this failure when it impacts our nursing homes, schools, hospitals, and other sensitive locations? You don’t tear down a bridge until the new one is built, but that’s exactly what the Democrats’ energy overhaul does. The stakes here are incredibly high and leadership hasn’t offered anything by way of a backup plan.

Representative governments must operate in reality. New York is only responsible for 3 percent of emissions here in the country and a relatively tiny 0.4 percent of emissions globally. I have said many times before, a diverse energy portfolio including renewable resources is critical to our state’s environmental and economic health, but these goals must be reached within the scope of practicality. Right now, that’s not what New York is doing. However, as we prepare for the governor’s upcoming State of the State address, now just a few weeks away, this is an ideal time to reassess the direction we are heading. I urge the governor and her allies to listen to these concerns and take them seriously. To be blunt, failure here is not an option. 

William (Will) A. Barclay, 54, Republican, is the New York Assembly minority leader and represents the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses all of Oswego County, as well as parts of Jefferson and Cayuga counties.

U.S. President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping met for four hours last month on an estate near San Francisco. That, in and of itself, is important. At a time of serious tensions between the world’s two most powerful countries, maintaining communication is essential.

Even if such talks don’t always produce breakthrough agreements, it’s vital that they continue. In the saying usually attributed to Winston Churchill, it’s better to jaw-jaw than to war-war.

And the U.S.-China relationship is the most important bilateral relationship in the world. As it evolves, it will have a profound impact on the future. The relationship is critical, not only to the two countries, but also to the rest of the globe. For it to succeed, we need to keep talking to one another.

Biden and Xi met in mid-November in conjunction with the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. The White House characterized their conversation as “candid and constructive.” Biden said the U.S. and China are competitors, but don’t have to be adversaries. The world, he said, expects us to manage the competition responsibly and not let it veer into open conflict.

The meeting, along with related conversations by U.S. and Chinese diplomats, did produce concrete results. Importantly, the two sides agreed to resume military-to-military communication, which is essential for ensuring that misunderstandings don’t escalate to warfare. China suspended the communication after then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan last year, and the situation worsened when the U.S. shot down a suspected Chinese spy balloon in February.

Xi also said China will crack down on the export of chemical precursors that Mexican drug cartels use to make fentanyl, a synthetic opioid that is 50 times more potent than heroin. Fentanyl is responsible for 70 percent of overdoses and poisonings in the U.S., according to the Drug Enforcement Agency.

The leaders also agreed to launch a dialogue on the risks of artificial intelligence and to step up efforts to slow climate change, including by reducing emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. And they promoted efforts to strengthen business, trade and person-to-person relationships — for example, an increase in the number of commercial flights between the U.S. and China.

The talks took place as the U.S.-China relationship seemed to be overshadowed by events, especially the bloody fighting between Israel and Hamas and the war between Ukraine and Russia.

Meanwhile, China’s economy has stagnated. Its “zero COVID” policy weakened business activity. Its fertility rate is low, and its population has begun to decline by some estimates.

Unemployment among young people topped 20 percent this year. A few years ago, Xi was promoting China’s state-controlled economic model as a superior alternative to America’s liberal capitalism. It doesn’t look so promising today.

The U.S. and China have many interests and challenges in common, but we also have real disagreements. We accuse China of engaging in unfair trade practices and industrial espionage. We take issue with its human-rights abuses in Xinjiang province and elsewhere. We push back against its aggression against our allies in East and Southeast Asia and its threats toward Taiwan. Biden has called Xi a dictator, and he didn’t back down from that description when reporters questioned him last month.

Domestic politics further confound the relationship. American politicians know they can win points by bashing China or by accusing their rivals of being soft on China.

Certainly, China does some things that displease us greatly. Balancing these concerns — working on our common interests while managing our conflicts — is hard work in diplomacy, but it is absolutely essential. The U.S.-China relationship, while likely to remain contentious, needs to be strengthened if possible. At the very least, it needs to be managed and maintained. The whole world depends upon it.      

Lee Hamilton, 92, is a senior advisor for the Indiana University (IU) Center on Representative Government, distinguished scholar at the IU Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies, and professor of practice at the IU O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Hamilton, a Democrat, was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years (1965-1999), representing a district in south-central Indiana.