Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein, who according to the most recent Quinnipiac University Poll data is at 4%, is continuing her crusade to end fossil fuels by 2030.
Continue Reading Below
The candidate joined the FOX Business Network on Friday to explain her stance on the issue, saying it isn’t an easy problem to solve, especially following the disastrous flooding in Louisiana, ongoing wildfires along the West Coast and science predicting a sea level rise of nine feet by 2050.
“What the science actually says and the studies and the experts say that if we have the political will, we can convert,” Stein said. “And it’s not just a matter of shutting down fossil fuel—it’s a matter of creating the good jobs for the economy of the future that’s healthy for us as people and healthy for the planet.”
Stein and the Green Party’s program, the Green New Deal, features four pillars, the first being “The Economic Bill of Rights.” According to the Party, this guarantees all U.S. citizens “the right to employment through a Full Employment Program.”
“What we’re talking about here is a guarantee to a job, with federal government as the employer of last resort,” explained Stein. “This is actually something that American people support. In poll after poll, the notion that if you want to work and you’re ready to work, that you deserve to have a job and that the government should provide that job if the private sector can’t provide it.”
Stein, a medical doctor, added that switching to more environmentally-friendly energy can help fund jobs.
Continue Reading Below
“Fortunately, we save so much money by the health improvements from phasing out fossil fuels—it’s actually enough to pay for those jobs to ensure the green energy transition,” Stein said.
The Green Party presidential nominee also discussed her stance on U.S. foreign policy, which currently is a major topic among other candidates and the American people.
“The man who is really the author of this concept of U.S. domination of the Middle East and of Asia has now done a 180 to say that this policy has been catastrophic—cost us $6 trillion in Afghanistan and Iraq alone. One million people killed in Iraq alone, not winning us the hearts and minds of the Middle East. We can actually take a much more collegial approach because what we’ve gotten for this is failed states, mass refugee migrations and in fact worse terrorist threats.
“So even at the heart of the establishment that first generated this policy says that we need to start developing principled, collaborative relationships, including with China and Russia. Right now we’re on the brink of conflict with Russia with 2,000 nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert. This is an extremely dangerous policy that we and NATO have been plunging headlong into. It’s time to call halt and reexamine this.”