Tamar Hallerman
GHG Monitor
09/14/12
ROMNEY UNDERSCORES CLIMATE CHANGE REMARKS
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney underscored this week that mitigating climate change will not be a priority if he is elected in November. In an interview that ran Sept. 9 on the Sunday talk show “Meet the Press,” Romney reiterated a point he made during his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., on Aug. 30. “The reason why I’m in this race is to help people. I’m not in this race to slow the rise of the oceans or to heal the planet, I’m in this race to help the American people,” Romney said on the show. The Republican nominee received cheers during his RNC speech when he mocked President Obama for his views on climate change. “President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and to heal the planet,” he said, referring to an Obama campaign pledge from 2008. “My promise … is to help you and your family.” Romney’s remarks mirror priorities established in his energy blueprint he released last month, which does not mention climate change but instead emphasizes the need to remove regulations and further develop domestic sources of energy such as oil, gas and coal.
While by no means a major issue on the campaign trail, climate change has started gaining some mentions in stump speeches as Election Day draws near. Obama and the Democratic Party have aimed to distinguish themselves from Romney and the Republicans by underscoring their belief that climate change is occurring and that human activities are contributing. In their platform approved last week in Charlotte, N.C., Democrats underscore the need for the U.S. to be a global leader in international climate change negotiations. The blueprint also calls for the implementation of domestic programs to help curb CO2 emissions. Meanwhile, in his acceptance speech for the Democratic presidential nomination Sept. 6, Obama said that if reelected his energy plan would involve continued efforts to reduce CO2 pollution. “Climate change is not a hoax,” he said. “More droughts and floods and wildfires are not a joke. They’re a threat to our children’s future. And in this election, you can do something about it.”
WASHINGTON POST CRITICIZES ROMNEY, OBAMA’S ENERGY PLANS
The Washington Post’s editorial board criticized the energy blueprints of both major party presidential candidates this week for what it says are not well-rounded plans. Instead, in an editorial published Sept. 9, the board called on both candidates to advocate for an economy-wide price on carbon. The editorial reviewed the energy plans rolled out by Mitt Romney and President Obama, both of which tout increased energy independence. While Romney emphasizes removing regulatory barriers to increase the production of domestically-produced oil, gas and coal, Obama during his presidency has focused on the development of renewables and cleaning up emissions from the transport and power sectors. However, the editorial board said that on the campaign trail, neither candidate has articulated a viable or well thought out long-term plan for the country’s energy future. “The visions articulated of late are far from farsighted. Neither adequately described the real and massive energy and environmental challenge America faces, let alone offered a credible strategy to face it,” the board said. “The next president must manage a gradual transition off carbon-emitting technologies and toward lower-carbon options—while also recognizing that America does not have the luxury of wasting its wealth while reshaping its energy sector. Neither candidate’s plan is up to the task.”
The board said that while Romney “deserves credit” for opposing the extension of what it says is a “particularly inefficient” wind production tax credit set to expire at the end of the year, it faulted the Republican nominee for failing to mention climate change in his energy independence plan. “[Romney] treats emissions reduction as a nice byproduct of pursuing other goals, inspiring little confidence that he would reduce pollution enough,” the board said. It also called Romney’s endorsement of the expansion of coal production “retrograde.”
In terms of the president’s plan, the editorial board applauded Obama for recognizing the dangers of climate change in his acceptance speech at the DNC last week in Charlotte, N.C., and for moving forward with fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, as well as other policies promoting clean energy research. “These accomplishments, however, resulted not from a well-designed plan but from a haphazard collection of half measures and lucky circumstances. Mr. Obama’s approach is both too expensive and too modest,” the editorial said. It said that Obama’s plan focuses too much on “poorly designed subsidies and political payoffs” like the PTC, and is too modest because it looks at CO2 emissions in a piecemeal, sector-by-sector fashion instead of an economy-wide carbon plan.
The editorial board instead calls on both candidates to push for what it says is the most financially-efficient climate and energy plan—installing a steadily rising price on carbon emissions. “Though we suspect both candidates recognize the logic of this idea, neither wants to stand up for it this election season. That’s another waste,” the board said.
