By Thomas Friedman
As we emerge from Labor Day, college students are gathering back on campuses not only to start the fall semester, but also, in some cases, to vote for the first time in a presidential election. There is no bigger issue on campuses these days than environment/energy. Going into this election, I thought that — for the first time — we would have a choice between two “green” candidates. That view is no longer operative — and college students (and everyone else) need to understand that.
With his choice of Sarah Palin — the Alaska governor who has advocated drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and does not believe mankind is playing any role in climate change — for vice president, John McCain has completed his makeover from the greenest Republican to run for president to just another representative of big oil.
Given the fact that Senator McCain deliberately avoided voting on all eight attempts to pass a bill extending the vital tax credits and production subsidies to expand our wind and solar industries, and given his support for lowering the gasoline tax in a reckless giveaway that would only promote more gasoline consumption and intensify our addiction to oil, and given his desire to make more oil-drilling, not innovation around renewable energy, the centerpiece of his energy policy — in an effort to mislead voters that support for drilling today would translate into lower prices at the pump today — McCain has forfeited any claim to be a green candidate.
So please, students, when McCain comes to your campus and flashes a few posters of wind turbines and solar panels, ask him why he has been AWOL when it came to Congress supporting these new technologies.
“Back in June, the Republican Party had a round-up,” said Carl Pope, the executive director of the Sierra Club. “One of the unbranded cattle — a wizened old maverick name John McCain — finally got roped. Then they branded him with a big ‘Lazy O’ — George Bush’s brand, where the O stands for oil. No more maverick.
“One of McCain’s last independent policies putting him at odds with Bush was his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge,” added Pope, “yet he has now picked a running mate who has opposed holding big oil accountable and been dismissive of alternative energy while focusing her work on more oil drilling in a wildlife refuge and off of our coasts. While the northern edge of her state literally falls into the rising Arctic Ocean, Sarah Palin says, ‘The jury is still out on global warming.’ She’s the one hanging the jury — and John McCain is going to let her.”
Indeed, Palin’s much ballyhooed confrontations with the oil industry have all been about who should get more of the windfall profits, not how to end our addiction.
Barack Obama should be doing more to promote his green agenda, but at least he had the courage, in the heat of a Democratic primary, not to pander to voters by calling for a lifting of the gasoline tax. And while he has come out for a limited expansion of offshore drilling, he has refrained from misleading voters that this is in any way a solution to our energy problems.
I am not against a limited expansion of off-shore drilling now. But it is a complete sideshow. By constantly pounding into voters that his energy focus is to “drill, drill, drill,” McCain is diverting attention from what should be one of the central issues in this election: who has the better plan to promote massive innovation around clean power technologies and energy efficiency.
Why? Because renewable energy technologies — what I call “E.T.” — are going to constitute the next great global industry. They will rival and probably surpass “I.T.” — information technology. The country that spawns the most E.T. companies will enjoy more economic power, strategic advantage and rising standards of living. We need to make sure that is America. Big oil and OPEC want to make sure it is not.
Palin’s nomination for vice president and her desire to allow drilling in the Alaskan wilderness “reminded me of a lunch I had three and half years ago with one of the Russian trade attachés,” global trade consultant Edward Goldberg said to me. “After much wine, this gentleman told me that his country was very pleased that the Bush administration wanted to drill in the Alaskan wilderness. In his opinion, the amount of product one could actually derive from there was negligible in terms of needs. However, it signified that the Bush administration was not planning to do anything to create alternative energy, which of course would threaten the economic growth of Russia.”
So, college students, don’t let anyone tell you that on the issue of green, this election is not important. It is vitally important, and the alternatives could not be more black and white.
How important of an issue is the candidates stance on the environment to you?
11 comments:
I think that the present environmental issue should be a major concern for the presidential candidates. Sure, limited offshore drilling is fine, but all we've done so far is drill, drill, drill. It's a method that has worked for us for many years but as Obama says, It's time for a change. The reason why America is a major world power is because our knowledge, ability, resources, technology, and creativity allow us to take a second look at current methods and change them to work more efficiently and be more cost effective for everyone.
McCain's proposal may lower gas prices, who wouldn't want that? But the earth isn't constantly replenishing itself for our sake, we'll eventually need to depend on something else, preferably something found closer to home. We'll have to deal with the same crisis later on anyway, so we might as well acknowledge it and come up with a solution now before we have to beg foreign countries for their oil because our wells and our wallets have all dried up.
People are still going to have to buy gas or other fuel no matter what happens. Not everyone can take public transportation or ride their bike across town. We need to get to where we need to be, even if gas prices are over our budget. The environmental issue plays upon supply and demand. Find us an abundant alternative source that can be bought at a reasonable price because people are going to have to buy it anyway.
The candidates must address this and think about changing the old into the new. The future is going to catch up to us. Until someone steps up the plate and attempts to hit the ball out of the ball park, neither team will win.
True it's important what leader we choose especialy one that will uphold his word and and rule with justice and consider his subjects in every move he makes. Really though even if we choose a "green canidate" you still have to acount for support in the legislative branch if they don't support the presidents view of the environment and the persistence of lobbyists nothing gets done. It would in the end amount to electing a lazy republican, in other words nothing would get don to help or harm our planet. Even the Bible tells us that "It does not belong to man who is walking to direct his step.". (Jeremiah 10:23). Every attempt to prove man can rule,even back to the garden of eden has failed. For, in every government thier is corruption and injustice. So no matter who you choose to rule such problems as unemployment,crime,environmental problems, and injustice will never be solved by humans because, "the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one"(1 John 5:19)So the real question is does your vote or choice of leader lies with Satan or God.
I think there is a time and place for everything. I don't think that we should make the families of the candidates our main focus, but I do think that we should know about their families. I disagree with Obama when he said that the way families deal with issues and teenage children isn't relevant to politics. I believe that it is. Parents have power over their children and if they can't control their kids, how are they going to control a whole country? If they can't deal responsibly with issues that come up just within their family, how are they going to deal with bigger issues, between different countries for instance? On the other hand, we are all human. We are all going to make mistakes so, just because the kids of candidates aren't exactly perfect, doesn't mean that their parents aren't cut out for the job. I think families should be a minor factor in the elections, but without invading on their privacy
I think that finding and using more renewable energy is a major issue. Voters should take a closer look at the individual candidate and their agendas rather than just voting based on party. One issue that i really care about is protecting the wildlife. Polar Bears are the first animals to be put on the endangered species list due to global warming. Reducing your carbon dioxide emissions at home is a very easy thing to do. Little changes would make a big difference not only for animals but also in the overall health of our planet. Both candidates seem to support lowering emissions, but will it really happen.
As much as the Republicans are avoiding the oil problem, they're eventually going to have to deal with it... Sarah Palin was bashing Obama for his little "talk" but at least he has a plan to try and solve this. What she wants to do in Alaska now might seem useful but we have to focus on the future as well. We need a president that IS looking to change the way things have been going in the past eight years while Bush has been in office. Our environment should be a big concern and I think that Obama is doing a wonderful job approaching this topic. He rocks!
The environment is important to me, and in my opinion, is a big factor in the upcoming election. America is immensely dependent on oil as of now, and with gas prices soaring I feel we need to become more independent. We have many opportunites to utilize the wind and solar power that we could have, especially here in West Texas. We need a president to lead us to independency and where there is wind build windmills, and sunlinght, solar panels. Also, with Global Warming looming over us we need to use lessen the amount of chemicals we emit. What worries me is that Sarah Palin may be only a heartbeat away from the presidency, and she wants to continue our dependency on oil and doesn't think Global Warming is real, despite the enormous amount of evidence supporting it.
I believe a candidate who is willing to promote "E.T." is a winning ticket in my book. While drilling in The Arctic may seem like an "okay" idea, especially with the incentive of "lower gas prices," it doesn't outweigh the issues of the environment and the outcome of our future.
The sole purpose of investing is to expect some "gain" in return. The only "gain" we will receive by investing in Alaskan oil is a stronger addiction to oil, an increase in hydrocarbon concentration, and gas consumption.
I'll have to agree with Obama in that E.T. is the way to go. Investing in E.T. will eliminate our perpetual need for oil, a cleaner environment, an increase in jobs, and definite "gain" in the economy.
The environmental issues of this country are a huge concern, and action needs to be taken to change the path that we are heading down today. With George Bush, the environment issues have taken a back seat to the war in Iraq and the falling economy.
Drilling in Alaska might be the answer for now, but in the long run it will not last. Oil is not replenishing so other sources need to be found to keep life going. The economy would be much better off if other renewable resources would be found, because the cost to fill up a car is drying up everyone's income. So Obama's idea for "E.T." is a great solution, and would dramatically help in several ways.
The Earth would appreciate if we had a president that made a difference in the environment. A green president is the answer to many issues.
It was my understanding that McCain, (in the pre-Palin days at least) wanted to draw up American oil to cushion the costs of the transition to eco. friendly technology. McCain was pushing the issue of, "America's great addiction," but he was also being realistic in terms of the lapse of time that will pass before everyone drives hybrids, or hovercars, or spaceships. In that time (which will probably take about 15 years, at least) we Americans will find ourselves either, still dependent on foreign oil, or tapping into our own reserves to cut costs.
Whichever way you spin it, Americans will be heavily reliant on a complicated foreign market, or, playing the catalyst in an environmental downward spiral.
The issue of a candidate's stance on the environment is important, but not the focus of this election. Although, it deals with our home and planet so it should be brought up. I believe neither candidate is jumping on the idea of a "green planet." McCain and Palin have almost brushed it all by, decided to punch some more holes in the ground in the arctic, and lowering the oil tax is doing nothing to help us except to buy more gas, pushing us to drill more. Our country depends too much on oil. McCain and Obama haven't showed much, if any, interest in alternative energy sources. McCain has said it straight out, and Obama, with his exceptional public speaking skills, has had the common sense to not throw the opposing ideas in our faces. However, "he has refrained from misleading voters that this" (offshore drilling) "is in any way a solution to our energy problems." Comparing Obama with McCain, I feel that Obama has the upper hand in planet conservation, but their is still not too much strength.
I'm not saying that with little strength in conservation, the candidate is not concerned with our country. The "green candidate" issue should not be focused on too much. If we have a tree hugger for president, we won't get too much accomplished, especially with the issue of the war in Iraq. Focusing on being "green" is OK, but shouldn't be pushed too hard.
There's no doubt that we will have to deal with the issues of alternative energy sources later. The oil fields will dry up, and our country's dependency on oil will spell a big loss for us. Our President needs to be mindful of the future of our planet, but right now we don't need to be pushed too much on it.
I think that the environmental issues of this country are definitely a huge concern and something does need to be changed with the way things are headed today. The issues have been forgotten about and I think that they should be important to the canidates.
Drilling in Alaska is not going to last and help things out in the long run. Other ways of living need to be put to use instead of relying on oil as much as we do. Therefore, Obama's plan would greatly help the econonmy if it was actually implemented.
Post a Comment