What is the impact of legislation intended to curb climate change?

For this terms final presentations, things were a bit different. Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, we. weren't able to be in the school building this week, and all the students created and are presenting their students from home, online. My project is connected to the fuel class. It is centered around environmental protection legislation, specifically the Green New Deal, a 14 page piece of legislation introduced the Congress that wasn't able to pass the Senate, but was discussed nationally. My General Question is "What is the impact of legislation intended to curb climate change?". I decided to address the question through a satirical news article, which can be seen below.

 In Clear Move Against DC Democrats, Trump Introduces “Alternative Green New Deal”, Appears to be Democrats Green New Deal Strategically Sharpied Over

WASHINGTON—Assuring members of Congress that a compromise has been reached, the President held a press conference Tuesday to introduce his new environmental legislation as an alternative to Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) Green New Deal. The introduced legislation would do the direct opposite for almost everything mentioned in the Green New Deal. It appears to be a printed copy of the GND, with Sharpie marks editing parts to counteract the intended meaning. 

      The move was reminiscent of what was known as “Sharpiegate” in September 2019, where a map of the path of Hurricane Dorian was marked over to extend the projected path of the hurricane, however, this instance was a much more blatant dig at House Democrats. 

The original Green New Deal, introduced in February of last year, was co-sponsored by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Edward Markey (D-ME). It failed to pass the Senate after being called to an early vote without discussion in March. The vote was almost exactly along party lines, with all but  4 of the 57 votes against it being Republican. This is all to say the vote has already been held, making it all the more mystifying why the president would introduce this, given that it’s already been struck down in the Senate. The “Alternative” version goes out of its way to contradict nearly every statement in the original, down to even the most uncontroversial, like the original line on page 3 stating that the United States was responsible for a disproportionate amount of carbon emissions being replaced with a line saying it is a normal amount.