The Mark UP

Tag Archives: Clean Air

Election Takeaway for Fossil Fuel Industry: Money Can’t Buy You Love

Posted by: Heather Taylor-Miesle -

Americans have returned a clean energy champion to the White House, but they didn’t stop there. All the way down the ticket, voters overwhelmingly favored candidates who support clean energy, clean air, and strong public health safeguards.

This is victory for everyone who likes to breathe clean air and drink clean water, and it is a resounding defeat for polluters and the dirty agenda they tried to sell to voters.

The fossil fuel industry went all in on this election. By mid-September, oil, gas, and coal companies had spent more than $150 million on campaign ads. Texas oil barons handed over $10 million to Governor Romney in one week alone—the week before he released his energy plan. By the time all the checks are tallied, the amount spent by dirty energy companies will be well over $200 million.

And yet the fossil fuel industry has little to show for it. Oil, gas, and coal companies spent $20 million to defeat Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), but he won anyway. He ran on his record of supporting renewable power and environmental protections and voters rewarded him for it.

They did the same thing in the New Mexico Senate race. Fossil fuel companies opened their checkbooks for Former Representative Heather Wilson, a pro-drilling, anti-climate action candidate. But voters preferred Representative Martin Heinrich and the fact that he made clean energy and climate action a central part of his campaign.

In Virginia, fossil fuel companies and other outside interests spent heavily to take a senate seat away from the Democratic Party. Voters weren’t buying it. They elected Former Governor Tim Kaine who has a long history of standing up for clean air and public health safeguards.

It turns out my mother was right: money can’t buy you love. If you can’t buy it for $200 million, then it’s not for sale.

That means these Senators are free to do the right thing on clean energy and clean air. They underwent a full-throttled, deep-pocketed attack on from the right and survived. Why? Because voters did not take the side of polluters. They took the side of clean energy champions.

This shouldn’t come as a big surprise; poll after poll confirmed voters’ desire for a clean energy economy. A September survey by Public Policy Polling, for instance, found that 53 percent of undecided voters in battleground states said they would support a Congressional candidate who wants to extend tax incentives for wind power, while 31 percent would choose the candidate who would kill those incentives. Fifty-nine percent said they favored Congressional candidates who support reducing mercury pollution from power plants and only 23 percent would chose candidates who oppose mercury standards.

Voters recognize that clean energy and clean air deliver real benefits to our communities. More than 120,000 Americans have jobs in the solar industry, and more than 150,000 people work building parts for and assembling clean cars—hybrids, electric cars, and other advanced vehicles that weren’t even available 10 years ago. More than 1 million Americans are now saving money on their electric builds because they made their homes more energy efficient. And soon, hundreds of thousands of children will breathe easier once power plants start following new limits on mercury, lead, and other air pollutants.

Oil and gas companies thought that if they spent millions and millions of dollars, they could distract Americans from these benefits and undermine support for clean energy. They were wrong, and they lost. Now the case is closed. It’s time for champions in the White House and Congress to respect voters’ wishes and stand  up for clean energy, clean air, and a stable climate.

Tags: , ,  

Americans Elect a Leader on Clean Energy, Clean Air, and Climate Action

Posted by: Frances Beinecke -

This blog is re-posted from the NRDC Switchboard.

Last night Americans reelected a president who made clean energy and environmental protection a cornerstone of his first term. They chose the one candidate who spoke seriously about climate change on the campaign trail and used his authority to reduce America’s carbon pollution. They rewarded this leadership by calling for four more years of action.

This is a victory for all Americans who want to breathe clean air, drink safe water, and protect treasured landscapes. And it is a setback for the fossil fuel companies that invested so heavily in this election and have so little to show for it.

Energy issues figured prominently in this election. Candidates mentioned it frequently on the stump and it was among the top three topics discussed in campaign ads.  Oil, gas, and coal companies tried to influence the debate by spending more than $150 million in campaign ads by mid-September. Polluters’ anti-environmental messages were reflected on the campaign trail, where Governor Mitt Romney ran on a platform of more drilling, more coal-fired power plants, more climate paralysis, and weaker pollution standards.

Yet despite the dirty ad blitzes and the anti-environmental policy proposals, voters rejected this outdated vision for our country. Poll after poll has identified people’s preference for a clean energy economy. Last month, for instance, Hart Research Associates found that nine out of 10 Americans, say developing renewable energy should be a priority for the president and Congress, and that includes 85 percent of Republicans and 89 percent of Independents. A survey conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center found that 80 percent of car owners want to raise fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2025,

The majority of Americans realize cars that go farther on a tank of gas, wind and solar energy, and cleaner power plants will improve our health and wellbeing far more than dirty companies can.

President Obama must tap this public support and push for health and environmental progress. And he can demonstrate bold and resolute leadership on climate change. The devastation wrought by Hurricane Sandy— and the drought that turned nearly 1,300 counties into designated disaster areas and the wildfires that forced thousands of people from their homes this year—reveal the danger climate change poses to our families and communities.

President Obama has already taken important steps to curb climate change. His administration issued fuel economy standards that will cut carbon pollution from new cars in half. It also proposed the first-ever limits on carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants. But we must do still more. We need carbon limits on existing power plants (click here to send a message to the administration in support of carbon limits). We need to extend incentives for wind energy and spur investment in clean energy research. And we need to promote energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances.

All of these measures will generate jobs and help clean up our air. But make no mistake, plenty of polluters and lawmakers will be lined up in opposition. Oil and gas companies will continue to pour money into the political system. The Tea Party still has many stalwarts in the House of Representatives—a body that voted over 300 times to undermine public health and environmental safeguards since 2011. And the Republican leadership will still try to erode investment in clean energy innovation and technology.

It will take tremendous effort to realize the sustainable future we seek. But we will succeed with a combination of presidential leadership and citizen action. The president can’t do it alone. He must have American people behind him. The administration moved forward with its carbon limits for new power plants in part because people sent more than 3 million comments in favor of them. We must create the same momentum for similar breakthroughs.

NRDC stands for the environment, not for any party or elected official. We will do everything in our power to help President Obama deliver on his goals of clean energy and environmental protection. You can help by adding your voice to the call for clean air and clean energy. Together we can use the next four years to solidify the foundation of America’s sustainable future. 

 

 

Tags: , , ,  

Ten House Dirty Air Villains to Watch Tonight

Posted by: Wesley Warren -

There are ten key House races to keep your eye on tonight that will determine if this election will make a difference in the House of Representatives. While most pundits agree that there are not enough hotly contested seats for the House to change hands, the results of today’s election will determine if moving forward we will have fewer dirty air villains and more clean air heroes, or if we will continue to have a House of Representatives that continues to vote against clean air protections the same way it did before.

Earlier in the year, the NRDC Action Fund produced a report identifying those members of the House that voted against clean air protections every single time, 13 votes altogether.  We also identified a list of clean air heroes who voted to protect clean air every single time. 

Below you will find a list of the most important races for clean air. Pay close attention to the most important race in Ohio’s 16th district between Jim Renacci and Betty Sutton. Renacci is a Dirty Air Villain who not only voted against clean air protections every single time but has also accepted more than $140,000 in contributions from polluters, while Sutton is a Clean Air Hero who voted to protect clean air every chance she got and has also been a strong supporter of clean energy policy that helped fight climate change.

Here are the other nine races:

2. CA-07: Dan Lungren v. Ami Bera
Dan Lungren is a Dirty Air Villain who has voted against clean air protections all 13 times and is one of League of Conservation Voter’s Flat Earth Five which are five of the worst members of Congress that deny the reality of climate change. He received $199,600 in polluter contributions.

3. CO-06 Mike Coffman v. Joe Miklosi
Mike Coffman is a member of the Tea Party Caucus and a Dirty Air Villain who has voted against clean air protections every time. He received $272,800 in polluter contributions.

4. FL-18 Allen West v. Patrick Murphy
Allen West is a member of the Tea Party Caucus, a freshman member of Congress and a Dirty Air Villain who has consistently voted against clean air protections. He received $100,522 in polluter contributions.

5. FL-26 David Rivera v. Joe Garcia
David Rivera is a freshman member of Congress and a Dirty Air Villain who has voted against clean air protections all 13 times. He received $50,600 in polluter contributions.

6. IA-04 Steve King v. Christy Vilsack
Steve King is a member of the Tea Party Caucus and is a Dirty Air Villain who has voted against clean air protections time and time again. He received $95,800 in polluter contributions.

7. IL-08 Joe Walsh v. Tammy Duckworth
Joe Walsh is a freshman member of congress, a member of the Tea Party Caucus, a Dirty Air Villain who has voted against clean air protections 13 times and is one of LCV’s Flat Earth Five.  He received $23,250 in polluter contributions.

8. MI-01 Dan Benishek v. Gary McDowell
Dan Benishek is a freshman member of Congress, a Dirty Air Villain who has always voted against clean air protections and is one of LCV’s Flat Earth Five. He received $135,000 in polluter contributions.

9. NY-24 Ann Marie Buerkle v. Dan Maffei
Ann Marie Buerkle is a freshman member of Congress, a member of the Tea Party Caucus, a Dirty Air Villain who has voted against clean air protections every time and is another one of LCV’s Flat Earth Five. She received $18,750 in polluter contributions.

10. TX-23 Francisco Canseco v. Pete Gallego
Francisco Canseco is a freshman member of Congress, a Dirty Air Villain who has consistently voted against clean air protections and is one of LCV’s Flat Earth Five. He has received $222,401 in polluter contributions.

Tags: , ,  

Yet Another Poll Show Latinos Want Political Candidates who Support Clean Air and Clean Energy

Posted by: Adrianna Quintero -

This week, a poll of Latino voters in Colorado again shows that when it comes to environment, Latinos want political candidates who support clean air and clean energy.

A poll released last week by Latino Decisions on behalf of Nuestro Rio, showed that Latino voters in Colorado want oil shale companies to disclose any potential water impacts before moving forward. This poll echoes results of a September poll of Latinos released by the NRDC Action Fund that Latino voters in four swing states –  Nevada, New Mexico, Florida and Virginia — decisively favor candidates for president and the U.S. Senate who support clean air and clean energy policies over candidates who don’t.

This Latino Decisions/Nuestro Rio poll found that Colorado Latino voters would overwhelmingly support a candidate who prioritized water protection over development. Given that Latino voters are an estimated 12% of the electorate in Colorado, this new data should give pause to candidates whose stump speeches revolve around letting polluters, and especially oil and coal companies, have their way with our land at the expense of our health and the well-being of our communities.

In this electoral season, regulations and protections on air and water have been tarnished as unnecessary burdens on the “poor little oil and coal” companies. Still, despite a multi-million dollar advertising campaign designed to convince voters that the only way to create jobs is by drilling our land and polluting our air, this poll, like those before it, shows Latino voters are not buying it.

While there are many important issues facing Latinos in 2012, including jobs, the economy and immigration, new polling shows that Latino voters in Colorado also care deeply about protecting the environment. Even when told by pollsters that some argue oil shale production could create jobs, a strong majority of Latino voters preferred more government action to ensure the environment is protected.

These findings reflect those expressed by over 100 business leaders, recreation organizations, farmers, ranchers and others in a letter to the Bureau of Land Management (a division of the Department of the Interior) this summer.

Furthermore, these poll results, and those preceding them, are not surprising when we consider that most Americans are concerned about drought and want to shift to cleaner energy and away from dirty energy sources, like oil shale, to avoid water shortages. This is particularly true given that there is no viable oil shale industry to speak of, and instead, is defined by a century of failed efforts to jump-start oil shale production by polluting waters in the West while spending millions of dollars of taxpayer funds.

These voter opinions show how out of touch Mitt Romney is when pushing for less protections of our air and water while demanding more protections of Big Oil profits that have already brought in $1 trillion  since 2001.  Romney’s proposals to slash tax incentives for clean energy sources, like wind, despite the fact that the wind industry produces tens of thousands of jobs in manufacturing, construction, and other services, run completely counter to what Americans want.

Latino interest in environmental protections is nothing new. Beyond being a culturally relevant issue for Latinos, many Latinos see the connection between protecting air and water to protecting our health. Perhaps that’s why when asked how important the protection of rivers, mountains, and air in Colorado was as an election issue, given all the various important issues on the agenda, a majority of Latino voters rated environmental protection as “important.”  Only 2% of respondents said it was “not at all important” as an election issue this year.

With the election around the corner, Latinos want candidates who can guarantee a healthier future—and they will go to the polls looking for a candidate who cares about their health and well-being. President Obama’s plan puts people and their well-being first, and that’s something Latinos get.

Full poll results posted here

 

Tags: , , ,  

About That Next Debate, President Obama

Posted by: Pete Altman -

You can bet on this (let’s say a buck rather than ten grand): Mitt Romney is out on the campaign trail somewhere today trashing the EPA, belittling clean solar and wind energy, dumping on electric cars, and making it sound like we should ditch “apple pie” and start talking about America as being all about motherhood, baseball and coal.

As they look to recover from the disappointing first debate performance, President Obama and his advisors should recognize one central fact: Romney is not taking all of these anti-environmental stances just because his funders and Tea Party backers want him to do so. The other reason is that Romney wants to muddy up these issues precisely because he knows that they can hurt him.

That may sound a little counter intuitive, but it is how the game of politics is played. Its an old strategy – attack your opponent’s strengths to cover up your own weakness (remember how George W. Bush went after Kerry’s 3 purple hearts?) It may be “smart politics” for Romney to protect his exposed flank this way, but it would be nothing short of silly for President Obama to go along with that strategy.

As the President looks ahead to tomorrow night’s debate, here are three compelling reasons for calling Mitt Romney out on his diverse range of anti-environmental stances:

  1.  Let’s not mince words about it: Romney is flat wrong about much of what he says about clean energy and clean air. His debate performance and other recent political claims have been fact checked and debunked far and wide. For Obama, this isn’t a case of having to argue one side of an issue against another.  All that is necessary is for President Obama to point out that Romney either doesn’t understand the issues or, even worse, he gets them just fine and he’s fine with making up his own facts about them.   (Call me cynical, but my money is on the latter.)  Either way, voters are not going to be comfortable with a candidate who can be so cavalier about the truth when our clean air and clean water are at stake.  But you need to call out Romney on all of this to make the point, Mr. President.
  2. President Obama, you have compiled a strong first term record on the environment.   Embrace it.   Tout it.  Shout about it from the rooftops.   You have advanced the growth of clean wind and solar power.  Your Environmental Protection Agency has made major strides on the Clean Air Act Front while protecting American jobs.   And let’s not forget the health benefits of a vigilant EPA:  The Obama campaign web site correctly points out that your Administration “established the first national safeguards to cut down on mercury and other toxic air emissions from power plants, which will prevent up to 11,000 premature deaths, 540,000 missed work days, and 130,000 cases of asthma each year, helping to keep our children out of the hospital and in school.”  This is one of the health standards that Romney would cut down with his plan to “take a weed whacker”to the EPA.It doesn’t stop there:  You also are making possible the revival of the U.S. auto industry through increased fuel efficiency standards for autos.  These are huge accomplishments that should not be allowed to disappear under a blizzard of Romney lies.    You have a hell of a story to tell here, Mr. President.  Don’t be bullied into silence on this important topic.
  3. Voters support what you are doing; don’t let Romney sucker you into ditching what are winning issues.  Everyone knows that this election has come down to a narrow band of undecided voters in eight or so swing states.  Good news, Mr. President!  Recent Public Policy Polling survey of more than 22,000 likely voters in battleground states shows the following:   “Undecided voters in eight swing states — Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin — decisively favor candidates for president and Congress who support clean air and clean energy policies over candidates who don’t, according to eight new state-specific surveys.”Romney has come out on the wrong side of the issue again and again – from opposing measures to reduce toxic mercury pollution, to rejecting standards for more efficient autos, to dismissing the need to reduce dangerous carbon pollution. Voters side with your views on these issues, but you still need to get in there and make that point, Mr. President.  And it is definitely there to be made!

This whole issue of undecided voters really is the heart of the matter when it comes to the Romney strategy of fuzzing up the environmental issues, Mr. President.  If he can get you to stay away from environmental topics in the campaign, you get fewer undecided voters in the key battleground states. In some ways, Romney is running less to persuade those voters to join him than he is to keep you, President Obama, from connecting with them. Don’t fall for it, Mr. President. Not only are you too smart to play Romney’s game, but you’ve got the winning formula in your environmental track record to “seal the deal” in the key swing states.

Tomorrow’s debate is only part of the challenge that the President faces in the coming weeks on environmental issues.   Fossil fuel giants and their allies have poured $153 million into campaign ads as of mid-September, and there will be millions more lavished on the dirty air and dirty energy agenda.    That fact just makes it even more important that the second debate is one in which President Obama takes back the environmental issues that he already owns in this campaign.

« Older Posts