Environment
Yesterday, when I was watching the CNN/YouTube Democratic debate I noticed that there was a significant number of Californian's questions that were selected to be asked of the candidates. Out of the 38 questions that were asked, eight came from Californians. No other state even came close to matching that total. Minnesota, Michigan, South Carolina and Pennsylvania had two each. The rest were single digits and two came from unknown locations.
Everyone in the country was eligible to submit a question. A state by state breakdown of the origin of all of the 2,000+ questioners is impossible to find, since we only know user names. However, during the debate they listed the hometown of almost all. So we can't know if this was a representative sample of the questions asked. Regardless, it is great to see so many Californians get a chance to ask the candidates questions during the debate. Wouldn't it be ironic if there were more CA questions asked during this debate than the one in LA?
Below the fold are the Californian questions and the name and hometown of the questioner.
>> read moreMoveOn held their climate change townhall this weekend and numbers are starting to come out from both the straw poll and the attendees. It was the largest MoveOn event since 2004, with over 100,000 people at 1,300 house parties. There is immense interest from activist Democrats in what the presidential contenders have to say on climate change.
Obama got a lot of kudos for his bold moves on the environment over the weekend, and broke some new ground during the townhall, announcing a proposal for carbon auctions to fund alternative energy research.
Some activists pronounced themselves delighted with Obama’s words aired over the weekend.
The president of Clean Air Watch, Frank O’Donnell, said Obama’s support of carbon auctions “shows a terrifically enlightened attitude.” O’Donnell noted that a recent Congressional Budget Office study found that buying and selling emissions allowances would produce long-term economic benefits.
Interestingly, that did not translate into votes in the straw poll, where Edwards had the clear lead in both the overall vote and among those who attended the house parties. MoveOn allowed all of their members to participate in the straw poll, even though many of them may not have seen all of the candidate's remarks. Obama came in forth in both. Environmentalists' concerns with Obama's position on coal-to-liquid fuel may have effected the results. He has been moving away from that position, much in the way that Clinton has done on free trade. However, the shifting may not have solidified support for him in this particular crowd.
The results of the straw poll will go for more than just a few blog posts (even if they are on the NYT site). MoveOn will run print ads in newspapers in Iowa and New Hampshire next week, announcing the results. They used an email announcing the results to fundraise for the ads.
“The enormous response we got from our members on this issue emphasizes how important it will be for our next president to make solving the climate crisis a top priority in 2008,” said Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn.org Political Action.
“MoveOn members want leaders who will take on the oil and coal industry and create a clean energy economy. That’s probably why Sen. Edwards’ support of cap and auction systems – which force polluters to pay citizens—and his call for more green collar jobs received such strong backing,” added Ilyse Hogue, Campaign Director of MoveOn.org Political Action.
MoveOn will host a third and final townhall in the fall on affordable health care. The first was on Iraq.
Hill: Sen. Obama seizes on Live Earth in bid to woo environmentalists
Tags: 2008 | Barack Obama | coal-to-liquid fuel | Environment | in the newsOver the weekend, MoveOn hosted one of a series of virtual townhalls, where the presidential candidates answer questions of concern to MoveOn members. This one was on the climate and timed to coincide with Live Earth.
All of the Democratic contenders participated and were asked three questions:
- How does your plan on climate crisis differ from other candidates?
- Do you support the use of an subsidies for liquid coal?
- How will Americans, not just corporations, benefit from new energy economy?
The responses were video taped and put up on YouTube. Nobody really made any real news in their comments, but it is an easy way to compare the candidates in a non-traditional format. The candidates often use the initial questions to address their broader environmental and energy policies.
Here is the highlights video.
Perhaps the most interesting tidbit was that while Senators Edwards and Obama stated their support for a carbon emissions market (cap-and-trade variation), Clinton said that it would be one of several things she would consider.
[UPDATE] 5:30 pm Check out this quick and snarky overview of the top five Democrat's plans on the environment by Grist. It is well worth a read.
Tommy Thompson on Environment
The U.S. must become more independent in its energy needs, argues Thompson, and break our reliance on foreign oil. To do this he want to invest more in renewable energy, like ethanol, so we can bring these technologies to market faster and more efficiently.
While acknowledging the existence of climate change, Thompson has said little on the topic other than, “we must come together and deal with our changing climate.”
Sam Brownback on Environment
Sam Brownback believes that we must reduce our oil consumption to stave off a potential energy crisis. He wants to increase domestic production of oil (including drilling in ANWR) and renewable fuels. His voting record in the Senate includes votes against pollution controls and for increased logging.
Energy independence:
Brownback believes America is on the verge of an energy crisis as a result of years of neglect and short-sighted domestic policies. Since our nation produces 39% less oil today than we did in 1970, our supply of energy has not kept pace with our demand, Brownback argues. This leaves us dependent on foreign suppliers, who often do not have America’s best interests at heart. This Congress, Brownback co-sponsored the Dependence Reduction through Innovation in Vehicles and Energy (DRIVE) Act. The bill aims to reduce our oil consumption by 2.5 million barrels per day in ten years by taking an innovative, market-based approach that relies on advanced technology and an expansion of renewable fuels.
In addition, Brownback believes the U.S. must produce more domestic oil and natural gas and has consistently voted in favor of oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
Pollution controls:
In 2005 Brownback voted against including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. This was a joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on March 15, 2005, relating to the removal of coal- and oil-fired electric generating units from the list of major sources of hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
Directly from the candidate:
Due to years of neglect and short-sighted domestic policies, America is on the verge of an energy crisis. Our supply of energy has not kept pace with our demand. Today our nation produces 39% less oil than we did in 1970. This leaves us dependent on foreign suppliers, who often do not have America’s best interests at heart. This Congress, I co-sponsored the Dependence Reduction through Innovation in Vehicles and Energy (DRIVE) Act. This bill aims to reduce our oil consumption by 2.5 million barrels per day in ten years by taking an innovative, market-based approach that relies on advanced technology and an expansion of renewable fuels. I will continue to fight for energy independence.
Rudy Giuliani on Environment
Global Warming
Giuliani opposes carbon taxes as a solution to global warming. He favors energy independence through alternative energy such as ethanol.
Nuclear Power
According to Giuliani, we should seriously consider building more nuclear power plants. He says nuclear power may be dangerous, but so are other source of power and nobody has died from nuclear power.
Directly from the candidate:
On Kyoto sending factories, jobs and investments to China and India?
They would move offshore to China and India and it would have no impact on global warming. Whatever your scientific conclusion about global warming, whether it's manmade or it isn't or whatever, the reality is that if you don't have restrictions on China, if you don't have restrictions on India, our contribution, ultimately, is going to be minor. We could put all these restrictions on ourselves and have just as much arguable global warming if China, India, some of these other countries that are going to be contributing a lot more to this don't become part of some kind of system to create alternatives.(Interview on "Kudlow & Company", RealClearPolitics.com Mar 26, 2007)
Direct Ties to Energy Industry
Giuliani’s law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani (formerly Bracewell & Patterson), is infamous for representing some of the nation’s largest energy firms. Among these are Enron, ChevronTexaco, Pacific Gas & Electric, Dynegy, and Southern Company.
Giuliani’s firm has defended these energy giants against charges of pollution and has represented them on the lobbying front as well. For example, Bracewell represents the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council – “a huge coalition of utilities including Southern Company and First Energy that lobbies for industry-friendly policies.”
Giuliani on developing and exporting renewable energy
Ron Paul on Environment
Paul sees environmental regulations as dangerous “regulatory takings.” Through excess regulation, Paul argues governments deprive property owners of significant value and use of their properties – all without paying “just compensation.” He adds the next president must get federal agencies out of these schemes to deny property owners their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property.
Below are some of the votes Paul has made relating to the environment:
- In 2006 Paul voted against increasing AMTRAK funding from $900 million to $1.1 billion.
- He voted against the Bush Administration national energy policy in 2003 and 2004.
- Voted against a 2003 bill that would reduce and expedite environmental and judicial reviews of forest thinning projects.
- In 2001 he voted against raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels.
- Voted against prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR in 2001.
- In 2000 he voted against starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol.
In 2006 he opposed a website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump.
Mitt Romney on Environment
Romney supports a market approach to solving our environmental problems. He says Republicans shouldn’t abandon pro-growth conservative principles in an effort to embrace the ideas of Al Gore. Instead of sweeping mandates, Romney says we must use America's power of innovation to develop alternative sources of energy and new technologies that use energy more efficiently.
Energy Independence
Romney wants to develop new alternative energy as well as drill in ANWR. To remain the economic and military superpower, Romney believes America must address achieving energy independence and become independent from foreign sources of oil. To do this will require a combination of efforts related to conservation and efficiency measures, developing alternative sources of energy like biodiesel, ethanol, nuclear, and coal gasification, and finding more domestic sources of oil such as in ANWR or the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
Research and Innovation
Romney supports fostering innovation and new technologies through funding for research. Governor Romney's administration will review how government invests our research dollars. H believes that the United States must invest more research dollars in power generation, fuel technology and materials science. Romney contends that it is in new technologies that we will find solutions to our environmental and energy needs.
For Example, Romney argues, new clean coal technologies are emerging, and some are already here. Fluidized-bed combustion and Integrated gasification combined cycle are two exciting and promising technologies. American Electric Power has announced plans for IGCC projects in West Virginia. Next, we can expect hybrid concepts such as combining combustion and gasification for even cleaner and more efficient power generation.
Environmental Flip-Flop?
Romney has received criticism recently for flip-flopping on the environment, bowing to big business at the expense of clean air for New England.
For years several Northeastern states were creating one of the most ambitious U.S. effort yet to fight global warming, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. The pact, commonly called RGGI ("Reggie"), commits seven Northeastern states -- Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York and Vermont -- to reducing their carbon dioxide emissions 10 percent by 2019.
Massachusetts was supposed to be among them. However, in December 2005 Romney abruptly pulled his state out -- despite the fact that several staffers in his administration had spent two and a half years and more than half a million dollars negotiating and shaping the deal. Rhode Island Gov. Donald Carcieri, also a Republican and an ally of Romney's, quickly followed suit.
Kyoto
Romney does not support Kyoto, believing it would kill jobs.
Mike Huckabee on Environment
As President, Huckabee says his first act will be to send Congress his comprehensive plan for energy independence and vows to achieve energy independence by the end of his second term. He sees energy independence helping to guarantee our safety and our prosperity.
To achieve independence, Huckabee believes we have to explore for new sources, conserve, and pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass.
He has supported increased reliance of alternative fuel technology, the use of state funds to clean up former industrial and commercial sites that are contaminated, unused, or abandoned. He also was to opposed state environmental regulations being stricter than federal law.
Directly from the candidate:
The first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence. I’ll use the bully pulpit to inform you about the plan and ask for your support. I’ll use the bully conference table to meet with members of Congress until I have the votes. The plan will get underway during my first term, and we will achieve energy independence by the end of my second term. The Huckabee Administration will be remembered as the time when we finally, finally achieved energy independence.
We have to explore, we have to conserve, and we have to pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass. Some will come from our farms and some will come from our laboratories. Dwindling supplies and increasing demand from newly-industrialized countries of fossil fuels are driving up prices. These price increases will facilitate innovation and the opportunity for independence. We will remove red tape that slows innovation. We will set aside a federal research and development budget that will be matched by the private sector to seek the best new products in alternative fuels. Our free market will sort out what makes the most sense economically and will reward consumer preferences.
The presidential campaign seems to have settled down in to a groove. Candidates traipse across the country rarely going a day without fundraising and calling at least one press conference. The early primary states are lavished with much more attention than the February 5th states. Every few weeks there is a debate or an event where they all get to make their stump speeches. This week it is the Take Back America conference in DC. The ratio of campaign events to campaign events is shifting as the quarterly deadline approaches and the need to feed the media beast with a large figure drives decisions. Hillary Clinton had a pretty classic campaign day today, which the AP details.
She was in her now home state of New York, but was upstate most of the day, going from appearance to appearance. She started off in Buffalo at the Eero Saarinenn designed Kleinhan Music hall for a $500 plate breakfast fundraiser. A neat space actually, if you happen to find yourself in Buffalo. It's right on the Frederick Law Olmsted park. Clinton left from there to plant trees with Buffalo's mayor at the City Honors High School. She had brought along seeds from a white ash tree from Eleanor Roosevelt's Hyde Park estate Val-Kill. The trees were meant to replace the ones that were lost in an enormous (even for Buffalo) snow storm. That one forced my grandmother to evacuate her home for a few days. The planting appearance gave Hillary a chance to promote her energy and environmental policy positions.
After planting trees and raising cash Clinton headed East to Rochester for a meeting on the city's crime rate and an opportunity to talk about her national anti-violence initiatives. Oh and she has another fundraiser scheduled in Rochester later today.
In that way, Clinton said, she sees her presidential run as a positive for New York.
"There's a linkage between everything I do in and for New York and what I'm trying to do on the campaign trail and what I want to do as president," Clinton said at City Honors High School, where a lawn full of children awaited her arrival for more than an hour.
"You can talk about global warming right here in Buffalo while we're planting trees that are going to benefit the people of Buffalo, and I want to make those connections," she said.
It is an effective approach that is employed by all of the major candidates. They smoothly transition from event, to press conference, to fundraiser. I am simply amazed that they don't screw up the name of the town more often, as they plant trees to harvest voters and cash.
AP: Hillary Clinton plants trees, reaps cash
Tags: Environment | Health Care | Hillary Rodham Clinton | in the newsJohn McCain on Environment
Climate Change
McCain has stood out from his fellow GOP candidates by taking on climate change. He has spoken often on the issue arguing it is time to take action on the issue. out on the issue
McCain and Senator Joe Lieberman carried the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act of 2003. In January of 2007, he again teamed with Lieberman and other co-sponsors for The Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2007.
ANWR
McCain has also stated opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and his voting record generally reflects this. McCain has also sided with the Bush Administration at times, including a vote in favor of confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior, a vote in favor of preserving the budget for ANWR oil drilling, and a vote in favor of reducing funding of renewable and solar energy.
Carbon Fuel Standards
McCain joined Gov. Schwarzenegger in a call for a nationwide roll-out of California's new low carbon fuel standard.
Nuclear Energy
McCain supports the increased use of nuclear energy in the US to become more energy independent.
Official campaign video of McCain on the environment:
Jim Gilmore on Environment
Energy Independence
Gilmore says as president he will launch a national energy independence project called American Energy Freedom, a NASA like effort to motivate and stimulate American ingenuity and technology using research and development tax incentives to help free our nation from its dependence on foreign oil within 25 years. Until then, Gilmore says he’ll push for steady and dramatic increases in domestic energy production and an increase in the size of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. In addition, Gilmore supports expanding our use of alternative fuels like ethanol, making dramatic improvements in battery technology for plug-in hybrid vehicles and the long-range development of hydrogen power for vehicles
Kyoto Treaty
In 2000 Gilmore signed position paper concluding the Kyoto Treaty must include reductions by all countries.
Nuclear Power
In 2001 Gilmore supported the use federal funds for nuclear cleanup, with state input.
Offshore oil development
Signed resolution in 2001 calling for the U.S. government to share more of its revenues from offshore oil development with the states to fund environmental and historic preservations and rehabilitation efforts.
Environmental education
In 2000 Gilmore launched Virginia Naturally 2000, an environmental education initiative to empower people with the knowledge they need to make the right decisions about protecting the environment.
Federal Clean Water Act
As governor in 2001, Gilmore supported the reauthorization of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (the Clean Water Act). This included support for an increased focus on watershed management planning, including funding for the State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) and nonpoint source pollution programs. He also supported flexibility for state’s to develop plans for attaining federally approved water quality standards in impaired waters - in consultation with local government officials and stakeholders - and to allocate responsibility for cleanup among contributors. The TMDL regulations should be revised, Gilmore held, by legislation if necessary, to give states adequate flexibility, funding, and time to address impaired waters.
Water
Gilmore signed 2001 resolution opposing decreased water flows in the Mississippi & Missouri Rivers.
Directly from the candidate
The United States today imports 60 percent of its oil, a situation that places our economy and our national security at risk. Jim Gilmore believes we can do better! As President, Jim Gilmore will launch a national energy independence project called American Energy Freedom, a NASA like effort to motivate and stimulate American ingenuity and technology using research and development tax incentives to help free our nation from its dependence on foreign oil within 25 years. In the meantime, Jim Gilmore will push for steady and dramatic increases in domestic energy production and an increase in the size of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Jim Gilmore also will support expanding our use of alternative fuels like ethanol, making dramatic improvements in battery technology for plug-in hybrid vehicles and the long-range development of hydrogen power for vehicles
Fred Thompson on Environment
Fred Thompson opposed the Kyoto treaty while in the Senate. Other votes:
- Voted YES on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
- Voted YES on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002 )
- Voted YES on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
- Voted NO on ending discussion of CAFE fuel efficiency standards. (Sep 1999)
- Voted YES on defunding renewable and solar energy. (Jun 1999)
- Voted YES on approving a nuclear waste repository. (Apr 1997)
Duncan Hunter on Environment
Hunter hasn’t campaigned much on environmental issues but several of his congressional votes provide insight to his positions.
He voted against increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M in 2006. (Department of Transportation appropriations; Bill HR 5576 Amendment 1008 ; vote number 2006-263 on Jun 13, 2006)
Also in 2006 he supported federal funds for a website promoting Nevada’s Yucca Mountain as the national nuclear waste repository. (Energy and water development appropriations bill; Bill HR 5427 Amendment 919 ; vote number 2006-200 on May 24, 2006)
In 2003 he voted to weaken the Clean Air Act’s anti-smog requirements by extending deadlines for certain cities that missed deadlines to clean up unhealthy air. [HR 6, Vote #598, 10/30/03]
He voted to weaken the Endangered Species Act in 2005. (Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act; Bill HR 3824 ; vote number 2005-506 on Sep 29, 2005)
And in 2003 he voted to speed up approval of forest thinning projects. (Healthy Forests Restoration Act; Bill HR 1904 ; vote number 2003-656 on Nov 21, 2003)
AP: Richardson agrees to book deal on energy policy
Tags: 2008 | Bill Richardson | Environment | in the newsReuters: John Edwards wants U.S. to back G8 on climate change
Tags: Environment | in the news | John EdwardsThe new LAT political blog is off to an uneven start. I have appreciated the heads up on coming polls and articles. But this is a silly hit on Obama. First they knock him for showing up to greenhouse gas press conference in an SUV.
Barack Obama showed up for a sparsely-attended news conference in Brentwood Tuesday to outline his plans to reduce greenhouse gases. The scene was a gas station that sells fuel made from vegetable oils. Good so far.
Trouble was he drove up in one of those big hulking SUVs that political campaigns (and the Secret Service) are so fond of driving. "When I'm president," Obama said, "any vehicle purchased by the federal government" will have a flexible fuel system that can run on ethanol. "Government should lead the way," he said.
Uuum, the Secret Service is kinda in charge of Obama's transportation. It is up to them to determine what is safe for him to travel in or not. I doubt that there is an armored Prius laying around in every town for him to rent. Would Malcom rather that Obama switch to a hybrid just around the corner from the event as other politicians have done?
Malcom then links to his collegue's article on Obama and coal-to-liquid fuels, as a sign of a shifting position. Trouble is that Obama has always said that his support for the program would rests on finding a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the production of coal-to-liquid fuels. The news is that he put a number on it, saying that he would only back the program if they "emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon than conventional fuels." His support for the program, was often reported without the caveat and he move to cut off the confusion. It was a good move and worthy of clarification.

