 |
Dear EarthTalk: Where do the leading presidential candidates stand on the issue of climate change and other environmental issues? -- Max S., Seattle, WA
 The
outcome of the 2008 presidential election could very well
have a big impact on a wide range of environmental issues,
especially climate change.
All of the current and recent Democratic candidates—Hillary
Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Dennis
Kucinich—support reducing carbon dioxide emissions nationally
upwards of 80 percent by 2050 in order to stave off global
warming. Likewise, each would like to see fuel efficiency
standards for cars and light trucks raised to at least 40
miles per gallon within the next few decades. Meanwhile, only
one of the major Republican contenders, John McCain, has even
articulated a position on the issue of global warming, with
most favoring expanding our base of greenhouse gas-spewing
coal-fired power plants.
As for specific track records, Clinton has an impressive
record of introducing pro-environment legislation into Congress,
and for her time in the Senate scores a 90 (out of 100) on
green voting from the nonprofit, non-partisan League of Conservation
Voters (LCV). Obama is newer to the politics of the environment,
but scored a 96 for his two years in the Senate from LCV,
and has garnered kudos from environmental leaders for the
aggressive climate and energy plan he unveiled in October
2007.
Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich wants to launch a Works
Green Administration similar to the Works Progress Administration
of the Great Depression, only this time to benefit the environment
through the development of alternative energy technologies
and infrastructures. Bill Richardson, who served as Secretary
of Energy under Bill Clinton and more recently as governor
of New Mexico, wants to be the “energy president,”
and has an 82 lifetime rating from LCV to back it up. He has
proposed the most ambitious carbon reduction plan of any of
the candidates (90 percent by 2050). John Edwards was the
first candidate to make his campaign carbon neutral in March
2007, and greens consider him perhaps the most progressive
of all the Democrats on the climate issue.
On the Republican side, the environmental bright spots are
few and far between. McCain is really the only choice with
any declared concern for the environment. In 2003 he co-sponsored
the first Senate bill aimed at mandatory economy-wide reductions.
While the bill didn’t garner enough votes to pass, it set
the stage for future iterations that could put the U.S. on
par with European nations as leaders in the fight to cut carbon
emissions. McCain is also the only Republican candidate specifically
opposed to drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge.
Mike Huckabee scores some points with greens for his willingness
to consider a specific increase in automotive fuel efficiency
standards and for his (limited) embrace of alternative energy.
Mitt Romney is willing to consider a cap on emissions, but
only if enacted on a global basis (including China and India,
that is). The other Republicans (Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson
and Ron Paul) have at best been noncommittal on climate change
and environmental issues in general.
|
|
WINNER
- Website of the Year 
