Corinne Ramey

Where Do the Candidates Stand on the Environment? John McCain

John McCain, it seems, has staked out positions on environmental policy that everyone loves to hate. While conservatives bemoan the fact that McCain actually acknowledges the existence of global warming (see, for example, the "Would McCain sink the economy with loopy Global Warming hysteria policies?" thread on the Sean Hannity Show discussion board), liberals envision the wrecking-ball effect a McCain administration could have on the planet.

Given that McCain has become the presumptive Republican nominee this election, what does his environmental record in the past and his campaign promises in the future mean for the planet and the middle class? He told voters that global warming would be one of the three major issues of his presidency, and has said that we have a "biblical obligation to be stewards of our planet," but what does he plan to do about climate change?

McCain's record on the environment, while not great, is certainly miles better than the environmental record of the Bush administration. He's been fairly critical of the administration in the past, speaking disapprovingly on the administration's effort to suppress scientific research on climate change. "For years we have been frustrated by the lack of recognition and cooperation on the part of the administration on addressing this issue," he said. McCain was against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and both sponsored and supported various Senate bills on the environment. He wisely voted no on the Energy Policy Act of 2005, a bill that, despite various tax breaks for items such as hybrid cars, did little to address problems of global warming and climate change and was full of earmarks and pork barrel projects for various energy industries.

When it comes to future policies, McCain is less clear than his Democratic counterparts, both of whom have carefully staked out positions in detailed energy/environment policies on their websites. McCain manages to bury his environmental policies; his website has an "environment" category, but the short blurb mostly consists of platitudes to remind us that Theodore Roosevelt was an environmentalist (which, apparently, proves it's ok to be both a Republican and an environmentalist), and that disregarding the environment reflects a "liberal live for today" attitude. However, various press releases and speeches provide a bit more info.

In general, McCain's policies are a somewhat watered-down version of those of Obama and Clinton. On greenhouse gas emissions, for example, McCain advocates a cap-and-trade system, but has yet to say what the desired targets would be. However, he co-authored the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act in 2003, the first Senate bill to call for mandatory reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. The 2007 version of the bill "would cap emissions from utilities, industry, and transport at 2004 levels by 2012 and then gradually decrease emissions to about 30% of 2004 levels by 2050." Unlike Clinton, who specifies that all cap-and-trade permits would be auctioned instead of given away, McCain offers no specifics on the distribution process. His proposed caps also don't go far enough; scientists say reducing U.S. emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 is necessary to stop global warming. Both Obama and Clinton have set this level as their target.

McCain's stance on fuel emissions fit a similar pattern. He has proposed increasing emissions standards, but unlike his Democratic rivals, hasn't given any numbers. As he said in an interview for Grist.com,

"We need to increase CAFE standards. We all know that. But the devil is in the details. I'm open to negotiations. We obviously don't want to drive all the car companies out of business. But there needs to be dramatic improvement and no loopholes."

Given his hesitancy to name specific targets now, McCain is probably more likely to be influenced by manufacturers than either Clinton or Obama, both of whom have committed to certain emissions reductions.

Perhaps one indicator of the "straight-talking" McCain's ability to cave in to special interests is his blatant flip-flop on the subject of corn-based ethanol, an alternative fuel that various studies have shown actually consumes more fossil fuel than it saves. In November of 2003, McCain declared himself firmly opposed to the alternative fuel. "Ethanol does nothing to reduce fuel consumption, nothing to increase our energy independence, nothing to improve air quality," he said. But in August 2006, McCain told voters -- and yes, he was in Iowa -- a different story. "I support ethanol. I think it's a vital alternative energy source, not only because of our dependence on foreign oil but because of its greenhouse gas reduction effects."

McCain's most controversial environmental stance, however, has been on nuclear power. McCain has long been a proponent of nuclear power and has advocated for the construction of new nuclear power plants and safer waste storage facilities. As he said in a campaign speech in August of 2007, "We have in use today a zero emission energy that could provide electricity for millions more homes and businesses than it currently does... If France can produce 80% of its electricity with nuclear power, why can't we?" However, the benefits of nuclear power bring with them some serious safety concerns. As DMI's State of the Union analysis says,

"The Union of Concerned Scientists report 35 instances of reactor shutdown since 1979 and the General Accountability Office cites 4,000 cases since 2001 in which inspectors found that reactor unit operators had not fully complied with safety procedures. Leaks of nuclear material into groundwater have been frequently documented. The influence of private industry on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has produced a culture of intimidation in which employees are afraid to speak up about safety problems."

Overall, McCain's climate change policies are a mixed bag. While his acknowledgment of global warming is encouraging, some of the actual policies he is proposing leave quite a bit to be desired. His policies also center largely around market-based solutions to climate change, and don't include many of the proposals mentioned by Clinton and Obama to create "green jobs," improve public transport, and improve energy consumption in low-income housing, policies that could have a direct and immediate effect on the middle class and the environmental sustainability of cities and urban areas. Compared to some of his conservative colleagues and the current administration, McCain looks pretty good on issues of global warming and environmental policy. However, compared to the realities of global warming and impending problems of climate change, McCain's policies just don't measure up.

Posted at 6:45 AM, Feb 18, 2008 in Energy & Environment | Permalink | Comments (6)