Sadly, the conventional wisdom seems to be that action on climate change is a political loser. According to the Washington Post, Rust Belt House Democrats who voted for the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy & Security (ACES) bill that passed in 2009 feel abandoned by the White House’s inability (or unwillingness) to force Senate action. And, many Democratic Representatives see this vote as a noose around their neck heading into the mid-terms like the Btu tax disaster was in 1994.
While there were (as this author would be glad to tell you in a different post) serious problems with ACES and it could have been (MUCH) better, this seems to be a case where the conventional wisdom is fostering reality rather reflecting reality.
As headline by SolveClimate, the question that should be central to Democratic Party political discussions as members head back to the districts for the August recess:
The short and the long of it: YES!
There are certainly members in competitive districts, notably Tom Perriello of Virginia, who know how to speak forcefully to why voting for climate mitigation is good for America and good for his constituents. From creating jobs to reducing sending American dollars overseas to reducing our national security challenges to improving our children’s health to, well, reducing the risks of catastrophic climate change, the benefits of serious action are clear across multiple domains. They are clear, if you wish to look. And, they become clear if you wish to explain them.
And, even better, the American people support the key measures. Americans want wind turbines to go up. Americans want more and better rail. Americans want energy efficiency. They want the greening of their child’s school. Americans want to see clean energy jobs that help build the nation for a better tomorrow. Americans want, in overwhelming margins, to see progress in the arenas of clean energy and energy efficiency which are two key tools to turning the tide on Global Warming’s rising seas.
Sadly, rather than a forthright explanation of clean energy action, too many members seem to want to put their hands in their pockets, look down at their shoes, shuffle their feet, and mumble their words. This is a recipe for utter disaster. They will face forceful attacks from people armed with deceptive, misleading, and frequently false information coming from groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, and other fossil-foolish interests.
In short, they face bullies and bullying tactics.
A simple question:
When facing bullies, are you better off trying to appear invisible or are you better off standing up for yourself and others?
While it might be despicable that they will face such tactics, just as it was extremely ugly the orchestrated violence at town halls across the nation a year ago, these Democratic Party politicians face a clear choice: will they shy away from defending their votes and mumble their words or will they stand up for truth and the bests interests of America with a forthright affirmative statement about the value to the nation of aggressively pursuing a clean energy future?
The first is the path toward electoral and national disaster.
The second is a path toward electoral and national survival.
Which path should they take?