With the midterms less than 50 hours from now, it’s fascinating to note how the environmental furor of the summer, especially in the aftermath of the Gulf Oil Spill, seems to have largely subsided in discussions about the elections. Nevertheless, the outcome of the midterms, especially in the House, could have disastrous ramifications for the future of climate legislation.
It’s important to note that climate change is not a forgotten issue in local elections. Politicians in states that perceive themselves as would-be victims of cap-and-trade legislation have spoken out against climate change legislation far-and-wide. The folks over at the environmental blog Grist and Think Progress have done an excellent job of detailing key gubernatorial, House and Senate races between global warming deniers and candidates who would “vote for climate action.”
There is no eloquent way of describing the comments by many of these candidates, other than to point out that they’re downright scary. They represent a brazen disregard not just for science, but for national security and for economics. Left and right, these politicians have turned their backs on their own words and the health of their nation.
Economics is undoubtedly a driving factor for their climate change denials, Grist notes. These politicians have received vast donations from groups like Koch Industries, but more importantly their states often thrive off of industries that are harmful to the environment. Take this ad by Joe Manchin, Democratic candidate for senate in West Virginia, aired to virulently show his opposition to cap-and-trade legislation. Manchin is desperate to demonstrate that he will protect his state’s coal-based economy were he to be elected senator.
It would be unfair to ask politicians to ignore the economic implications of climate legislation, but the extent to which they blatantly discredit science with impunity is reprehensible. While some states may suffer in the short-run, as energy prices could potentially increase, it would be an act of great courage for just one Republican in the Heartland to proclaim that fighting climate change now will have economic benefits in the future.
In this report from NPR, All Things Considered reports that the Republican pollster Frank Luntz attributes lack of voter concern on climate change to the even more dismal economy of 2010, as compared to 2008. The problem here is again one of perception. Voters see climate change legislation has having a slew of detrimental effects and few positive ones, while neglecting the strain on the economy that non-renewable resources presently have. It’s hard to track where this antipathy originates – news reports often frame politicans as skewing their views on climate change to appease voters – but Luntz’s appraisal seems to be the most accurate.
Regardless, it’s unlikely that serious action on climate issues will occur unless a chorus of Republicans works with the Administration and congressional Democrats. It’s sad to say that a Republican in favor of climate change legislation in many states is now a matter of courage. The midterms are likely to be disastrous for climate legislation, and while I fervently hope this weren’t the case, I’ll have a full post-election analysis next week.
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons