Issue #3: Global Warming
I find it hard to write about the various positions of the Democratic and Republican candidates on global warming without giving a hat tip to the non-candidate, former Vice President Al Gore. Gore, through his lectures and documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," did much to raise world attention to the dangers of global warming. He did the job that George W. Bush should have been doing, but we all know that story. Gore richly deserved his Nobel Peace Prize.
So here we go:
3. Global warming. This is really a subset of No. 2. Like it or not, nuclear energy needs to be considered again. But only if the plants are run on a non-profit basis, preferably by government, so the incentive isn't there to cut corners to increase the bottom line. There are many reasons to be against nuclear power, but they are damned good at producing vast amounts of electricity without contributing to global warming. We have to--and can--find a way to do it safely and find safe storage for nuclear waste.
This post is going to be weighted toward the Democrats, because the Republicans really don't have much to say. It is a toxic issue for them, anathema to their most conservative religious supporters and to their Big Oil financiers. Even if it's killing the rest of us.
Barack Obama: Obama seems to have channeled the best of Al Gore. "Global warming is real, is happening now, and is the result of human activities. The number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has almost doubled in the last 30 years. Glaciers are melting faster; the polar ice caps are shrinking; trees are blooming earlier; oceans are becoming more acidic, threatening marine life; people are dying in heat waves; species are migrating, and eventually many will become extinct."
Obama favors an 80 percent reduction in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, which he would accomplish in part through a market-based cap-and-trade program. He would require all emission rights to be auctioned off, not given away.
John Edwards: He would also require carbon dioxide emissions to be reduced 80 percent by 2050 using a cap-and-trade program. He would renegotiate the Kyoto Treaty so developing nations are also required to reduce their pollution. In return, he would offer technology and trade incentives to developing nations to win their cooperation. Edwards would repeal tax subsidies for big oil companies, a perennial issue of the left.
Dennis Kucinich: He would have the U.S. ratify the Kyoto Treaty and implement its recommendations. Kucinich is concerned that the world, nearing 8 billion in population, may reach a sustainability crisis. He is a strong opponent of nuclear power, in part because of years of dealing with the problematic Davis-Besse nuclear plant in or near his Ohio district. Unfortunately, nuclear, for all its risks and problems, is the best way to produce large amounts of electricity without adding to global warming.
Hillary Clinton: Not as detailed a plan as Obama's, but thankfully without his promotion of ethanol as a serious alternative fuel. Ethanol production is giving Iowa farmers the best years of their lives, according to one of my Iowa relatives, but it's also driving food prices through the roof. Sen. Clinton also favors a cap-and-trade program to reduce emissions, with the same requirement for all credits to be auctioned that Obama and Edwards would impose. She adopts the same reduction goal of 80 percent by 2050. A welcome plan, as she's still the most likely candidate to get the Democratic nomination and become our next President.
The Republicans:
Ron Paul: Not a word.
Mike Huckabee: Not a word.
Rudolph Giuliani: Not a word.
Fred Thompson: Doesn't mention global warming, but calls for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions "without harming our economy." The only reason to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, if it's necessary to say this, is to reduce global warming. He favors more research into technologies "that improve the environment, especially the reduction of CO2 emissions."
John McCain: McCain, in what is probably a coded message to fundamentalist Christians, speaks of "an obligation to be proper caretakers of creation." He says he has been "a leader on the issue of global warming with the courage to call the nation to action on an issue we can no longer afford to ignore" and "has offered common sense approaches to limit carbon emissions by harnessing market forces that will bring advanced technologies, such as nuclear energy, to the market faster, reduce our dependence on foreign supplies of energy, and see to it that America leads in a way that ensures all nations do their rightful share." No wonder the right hates him.
Other than McCain, the differences between Democrats and Republicans, between left and right don't get much more stark than on the issue of global warming.