You can almost hear the clankity, clank, clank of the finish line - starting as a small clamor and erupting into a deafening roar, “And down the stretch they come!”
In two weeks the mud will cease, exit polls will explode with speculative news and Americans will elect a president to serve a four-year term that will begin during one of the most intense, tumultuous times in the history of the country. Money will be tight, room for error tighter and the public’s microscope will be on the highest power. Things can go one of two ways for Senator Barack Obama (D) and Senator John McCain (R) – the upcoming term could be the chance to be remembered as a political hero or as an ill-prepared failure unable to capture the opportunistic goldmine that is the current times. Because that’s how high the stakes are now a days – there is no more skating by or biding time – it’s act or be acted on. And while the only green on people’s minds lately has been the stuff they’re losing from their 401(k)’s and mutual funds, there’s a lifestyle of environmental understanding and conservation that cannot be ignored and will not be ignored.
In the second of a two part series leading up the elections, DTE will examine the environmental attitudes of Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain.
Photo courtesy of the Huffington Post
The unearthed issue of Time sits on the desk, dated October 23rd 2006. On the cover, it says “Why Barack Obama Could Be The Next President?” with a likable close-up that we’ve now become accustomed to. It’s funny to reflect: Who could’ve predicted Obama would strike such a responsive and transformational chord with the American public?
Keep in mind, he didn’t announce his candidacy until after that issue, February 10th, 2007 (at the same place where Abraham Lincoln delivered his historic "House Divided" speech in 1858.) And it was there that Obama identified his top three priorities as the Iraq War, health care, and energy independence.
Obama is "by far one of the most compelling and knowledgeable politicians on the environment I've ever sat in a room with," Mark Longabaugh, senior vice president for political affairs at League of Conservation Voters, told Grist. "I've been playing national politics for more than 20 years and I quite literally can't remember one person I've met — even on a national level — who was more in command of facts, more eloquent, and more passionate on these issues than Sen. Obama." In fact, The League Of Conservation Voters–a nonpartisan group that examines politicians environmental record–gave him a 86 percent rating as Senator. (Note: It was 96 percent before the campaign began; we read somewhere on the internet he has been a busy dude lately.)
As an undergrad at Columbia University, Obama worked with a Ralph Nader sponsored organization to convince minority students at City College in Harlem to recycle. A few years later, when he worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, he fought for lead reduction in the Altgeld Gardens neighborhood.
Obama's environmental commitment hits close to home. His six-year-old daughter, Malia, has chronic asthma. He often cited this as a reason for cleaning up smog and air pollution as a Junior Senator from Illinois. More people die from asthma attacks in Chicago than anywhere else in the U.S. Illinois itself has the highest African-American death rate from asthma in the country, four times the rest of the country.
It's notable that Illinois is an industrial state, not welcoming environmentalists and progressives. In his two and a half years in the U.S. Senate, he introduced or cosponsored nearly 100 eco-related bills. These ranged from lead poisoning and mercury emissions to auto fuel economy and biofuels promotion.
On energy, Obama has an aggressive plan to say the least. He calls for cutting U.S. carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This would be accomplished through a cap-and-trade system that would auction off 100 percent of emissions permits, making polluters pay for the CO2 they emit. Revenue raised from auctioning emissions permits, between $30 billion and $50 billion a year, would then be channeled toward clean energy technology, creating "green jobs," and helping low-income Americans afford higher energy bills. In addition, he calls for 25 percent of U.S. electricity to come from renewable sources by 2025, and for 30 percent of the federal government's electricity to come from renewables by 2020. (Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal criticized Obama for his partisan “carbon crackdown.”) He also believes nuclear power and clean coal should part of the U.S.'s alternative energy potential, but with rigorous safety standards.
Obama took some flack from environmentalists for opposing a House bill to reform the 1872 Mining Law. The law lets companies mine public lands without paying royalties and doesn’t hold them accountable for mine cleanup. However, Obama said while overhauling the law would have hurt the Nevada economy, where mining is still vital, the law does need to be updated to improve environmental protections and compensation for the use of federal land.
"Obama supports the Roadless Area Conservation Rule to keep over 58 million acres of national forests pristine," according to the candidate's environment plan [PDF]. "As president, he will repair the damage done to our national parks by inadequate funding and emphasize the protection and restoration of our national forests."
In an interview with the the Flathead Beacon of Montana, Obama believes the country can balance economic growth and sustainability when it comes to logging. "If we're going to have timber industries operating on public land, then we should make sure that old-growth forests aren't destroyed but it's that second growth are what are harvested."
Now comes a particular favorite issue of DTE: national parks. Obama said he is "committed to addressing the funding shortfall that the National Park Service has experienced," planning to push for the park service to have enough money to meet its backlog of maintenance needs by the service's 100th anniversary in 2016. Although he would never say as much, that makes Obama more like Teddy Roosevelt than that other one.
But again, let’s go back to when this thing started. In 2007, Obama was asked the most important environmental issue (after climate change and energy) facing the nation: "Restoring the strength of the EPA to adequately enforce our clean-air, clean-water, and other environmental-protection laws, after over six years of ruling by ideology rather than science and adherence to the law."
Before the Senator John McCain hit machine brought us favorites like, “Bomb Bomb Bomb – Bomb Bomb Iran” and “Drill Baby Drill”, he cranked out a duet with Senator Joe Lieberman about climate change – the hot track of the winter, the Climate Stewardship Act of 2003.
You see, before he entered the race and started suckling from the teet of Karl Rove (yeah, the same Weeble that demoralized him in ’00 in his attempt to claim the GOP presidential nomination against W) he was outspoken in his support for climate change. When Rovian “logic” was saying global warming was a made-up hippie concoction of the Hollywood left, McCain was getting all “Mavericky” on his party calling global warming "a serious and urgent economic, environmental, and national-security challenge."
The Arizona senator’s stance on climate change hasn’t changed, though most of his other opinions have. McCain, like Obama, says “that human-caused climate change is real and urgent, and that [he] would sharply diverge from President Bush’s course by proposing legislation requiring sharp cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century,” according to Andrew Revkin in The New York Times.
Unfortunately, as alluded to in the first presidential debate, any real climate stabilization progress is in danger of being held hostage by our plummeting financial system. And McCain didn’t ease climate anxiety any by stating on the trail that he may not pursue mandatory emission cuts, an action he has been in support of all campaign long. That being said, mounting pressure from all sides of the isle will almost certainly force the hand of McCain on climate issues – if only the same could be said for some other stances.
Since June of this year John McCain has been the president of the offshore drilling fan club, calling on lifting the federal ban on offshore drilling in new areas (a ban he emphatically supported in his run for president in 1999) and putting the phrase “Drill Baby Drill” into our lexicon. In addition, his co-star in this B-list film Sarah Palin has been a big proponent of oil exploration in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a potential to produce more domestic energy – energy that would cost billions, destroy valuable natural resources and take upwards of 20 years to see any return from. McCain has claimed he supports renewable energy sources but hasn’t given any targets in his campaigning.
One target the Arizona Senator has zeroed in on is his goal for America to build 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030, ultimately increasing to 100 new plants and calling on government support for the nuclear industry. What McCain doesn’t let you know is that nuclear power is a heavily subsidized mistake. – plants are extremely expensive to build and the consumer not only pays for the power but pays the taxes that cover the oversight bureaucracy, disposal and protection. Nuclear power is very slow, very dangerous and worst of all it’s undemocratic; very little dialogue on the subject occurs outside of government and the nuclear industry. And here in Washington we have a front row seat to the affects of nuclear.
When speaking of the Western front,. all appears good from McCain’s campaign trail. He supports the establishment of a National Parks Centennial Fund which would provide more resources to the operation and maintenance of the park system in time for the 100th year celebration in 2016. McCain advocates reforming the 1872 Mining Law saying, "Any law that was passed in 1872 is going to have to be updated. Hello, times have changed. Duh.” However, he has recently supported allowing firearms in National Parks and has yet to speak out against the Bush administrations plans to allow uranium mining within five miles of his state’s crown jewel, Grand Canyon National Park.
The DTE blog is committed to reporting and sharing environmental news and sustainability information from across the Inland Northwest.
Photo courtesy of the Huffington Post
The unearthed issue of Time sits on the desk, dated October 23rd 2006. On the cover, it says “Why Barack Obama Could Be The Next President?” with a likable close-up that we’ve now become accustomed to. It’s funny to reflect: Who could’ve predicted Obama would strike such a responsive and transformational chord with the American public?
Keep in mind, he didn’t announce his candidacy until after that issue, February 10th, 2007 (at the same place where Abraham Lincoln delivered his historic "House Divided" speech in 1858.) And it was there that Obama identified his top three priorities as the Iraq War, health care, and energy independence.
Obama is "by far one of the most compelling and knowledgeable politicians on the environment I've ever sat in a room with," Mark Longabaugh, senior vice president for political affairs at League of Conservation Voters, told Grist. "I've been playing national politics for more than 20 years and I quite literally can't remember one person I've met — even on a national level — who was more in command of facts, more eloquent, and more passionate on these issues than Sen. Obama." In fact, The League Of Conservation Voters–a nonpartisan group that examines politicians environmental record–gave him a 86 percent rating as Senator. (Note: It was 96 percent before the campaign began; we read somewhere on the internet he has been a busy dude lately.)
As an undergrad at Columbia University, Obama worked with a Ralph Nader sponsored organization to convince minority students at City College in Harlem to recycle. A few years later, when he worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, he fought for lead reduction in the Altgeld Gardens neighborhood.
Obama's environmental commitment hits close to home. His six-year-old daughter, Malia, has chronic asthma. He often cited this as a reason for cleaning up smog and air pollution as a Junior Senator from Illinois. More people die from asthma attacks in Chicago than anywhere else in the U.S. Illinois itself has the highest African-American death rate from asthma in the country, four times the rest of the country.
It's notable that Illinois is an industrial state, not welcoming environmentalists and progressives. In his two and a half years in the U.S. Senate, he introduced or cosponsored nearly 100 eco-related bills. These ranged from lead poisoning and mercury emissions to auto fuel economy and biofuels promotion.
On energy, Obama has an aggressive plan to say the least. He calls for cutting U.S. carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This would be accomplished through a cap-and-trade system that would auction off 100 percent of emissions permits, making polluters pay for the CO2 they emit. Revenue raised from auctioning emissions permits, between $30 billion and $50 billion a year, would then be channeled toward clean energy technology, creating "green jobs," and helping low-income Americans afford higher energy bills. In addition, he calls for 25 percent of U.S. electricity to come from renewable sources by 2025, and for 30 percent of the federal government's electricity to come from renewables by 2020. (Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal criticized Obama for his partisan “carbon crackdown.”) He also believes nuclear power and clean coal should part of the U.S.'s alternative energy potential, but with rigorous safety standards.
Obama took some flack from environmentalists for opposing a House bill to reform the 1872 Mining Law. The law lets companies mine public lands without paying royalties and doesn’t hold them accountable for mine cleanup. However, Obama said while overhauling the law would have hurt the Nevada economy, where mining is still vital, the law does need to be updated to improve environmental protections and compensation for the use of federal land.
"Obama supports the Roadless Area Conservation Rule to keep over 58 million acres of national forests pristine," according to the candidate's environment plan [PDF]. "As president, he will repair the damage done to our national parks by inadequate funding and emphasize the protection and restoration of our national forests."
In an interview with the the Flathead Beacon of Montana, Obama believes the country can balance economic growth and sustainability when it comes to logging. "If we're going to have timber industries operating on public land, then we should make sure that old-growth forests aren't destroyed but it's that second growth are what are harvested."
Now comes a particular favorite issue of DTE: national parks. Obama said he is "committed to addressing the funding shortfall that the National Park Service has experienced," planning to push for the park service to have enough money to meet its backlog of maintenance needs by the service's 100th anniversary in 2016. Although he would never say as much, that makes Obama more like Teddy Roosevelt than that other one.
But again, let’s go back to when this thing started. In 2007, Obama was asked the most important environmental issue (after climate change and energy) facing the nation: "Restoring the strength of the EPA to adequately enforce our clean-air, clean-water, and other environmental-protection laws, after over six years of ruling by ideology rather than science and adherence to the law."
Before the Senator John McCain hit machine brought us favorites like, “Bomb Bomb Bomb – Bomb Bomb Iran” and “Drill Baby Drill”, he cranked out a duet with Senator Joe Lieberman about climate change – the hot track of the winter, the Climate Stewardship Act of 2003.
You see, before he entered the race and started suckling from the teet of Karl Rove (yeah, the same Weeble that demoralized him in ’00 in his attempt to claim the GOP presidential nomination against W) he was outspoken in his support for climate change. When Rovian “logic” was saying global warming was a made-up hippie concoction of the Hollywood left, McCain was getting all “Mavericky” on his party calling global warming "a serious and urgent economic, environmental, and national-security challenge."
The Arizona senator’s stance on climate change hasn’t changed, though most of his other opinions have. McCain, like Obama, says “that human-caused climate change is real and urgent, and that [he] would sharply diverge from President Bush’s course by proposing legislation requiring sharp cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century,” according to Andrew Revkin in The New York Times.
Unfortunately, as alluded to in the first presidential debate, any real climate stabilization progress is in danger of being held hostage by our plummeting financial system. And McCain didn’t ease climate anxiety any by stating on the trail that he may not pursue mandatory emission cuts, an action he has been in support of all campaign long. That being said, mounting pressure from all sides of the isle will almost certainly force the hand of McCain on climate issues – if only the same could be said for some other stances.
Since June of this year John McCain has been the president of the offshore drilling fan club, calling on lifting the federal ban on offshore drilling in new areas (a ban he emphatically supported in his run for president in 1999) and putting the phrase “Drill Baby Drill” into our lexicon. In addition, his co-star in this B-list film Sarah Palin has been a big proponent of oil exploration in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as a potential to produce more domestic energy – energy that would cost billions, destroy valuable natural resources and take upwards of 20 years to see any return from. McCain has claimed he supports renewable energy sources but hasn’t given any targets in his campaigning.
One target the Arizona Senator has zeroed in on is his goal for America to build 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030, ultimately increasing to 100 new plants and calling on government support for the nuclear industry. What McCain doesn’t let you know is that nuclear power is a heavily subsidized mistake. – plants are extremely expensive to build and the consumer not only pays for the power but pays the taxes that cover the oversight bureaucracy, disposal and protection. Nuclear power is very slow, very dangerous and worst of all it’s undemocratic; very little dialogue on the subject occurs outside of government and the nuclear industry. And here in Washington we have a front row seat to the affects of nuclear.
When speaking of the Western front,. all appears good from McCain’s campaign trail. He supports the establishment of a National Parks Centennial Fund which would provide more resources to the operation and maintenance of the park system in time for the 100th year celebration in 2016. McCain advocates reforming the 1872 Mining Law saying, "Any law that was passed in 1872 is going to have to be updated. Hello, times have changed. Duh.” However, he has recently supported allowing firearms in National Parks and has yet to speak out against the Bush administrations plans to allow uranium mining within five miles of his state’s crown jewel, Grand Canyon National Park.
