7-27-08, 11:20 am
A recent commentary from The Environmental Magazine (E) describes presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama as the greener of the two candidates for president.
Asserting that global warming is the 'most pressing environmental issue,' the E commentary stated that the approaches of Obama and Republican John McCain to resolving the problem 'differ in significant ways.'
The life of the planet and of humans are at stake in the very near future because of the global climate crisis, putting this question, by necessity, at or near the top of any list of priorities for the country.
In recent weeks, John McCain has attempted to appeal to moderate voters by talking about the issue, but has undermined his own positions by calling for new offshore and ANWR oil drilling, refusing to make caps on carbon emissions mandatory, and in his voluntary cap program, targets emissions cuts far below what scientists tell us are needed to turn the tide against climate change. McCain is also weak on promoting investment in safe renewable alternative energy resources.
Obama, according to the E article, proposes reducing greenhouse gas emission that cause global warming by 80 percent over the next four decades, using a mandatory cap and trade system. He has also proposed sizeable investments in alternative energy research and development, increasing fuel economy standards, and new mass transit.
The differences between the policies of the candidates is also reflected in their voting records.
Relying on voting statistics compiled by the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), E reports that McCain's voting record over his career stands at 24 percent, and zero for 2007. 'McCain missed all 15 critical environmental votes last year.' LCV characterized McCain's record and his stated positions as 'outdated,' and said that McCain 'flip-flops on core environmental issues.”
The record shows that despite his recent statements, McCain is new to the environmental debate and has yet to use his leadership in the Republican Party and his Senate vote to commit to changing environmental policy.
By contrast, Obama has a lifetime score of 86 percent, and his 2006 score stood at 100 percent. He did miss four votes in 2007 due to campaigning, but by no means showed the systematic refusal to go on the record on the environment as McCain's voting record indicates.
The E Magazine article also pointed to differences between the two on nuclear energy. McCain, the article noted, wants to greatly expand the role of nuclear power in the economy, but has yet to address the urgent question of safety, health, and contamination.
Obama has indicated that safe nuclear energy should be part of the picture, but 'would rather bolster alternative energy sources like wind and solar power that do not have the nasty side effect of radioactive waste in need of storage and disposal.'
The E Magazine article further pointed to protection of water resources, wetlands, public land, and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, as well as a US commitment to including strong environmental standards in international trade agreements as key points on which the candidates differ.
--Reach Joel Wendland at
