Global Warming

by Edward Grabianowski
October 2004

The Issue


Photo courtesy NOAA
Environmental issues often come down to a simple equation, with money on one side and environmental health on the other. The issue of global warming, in which gasses emitted by factories and cars trap heat in the earth's atmosphere, is no different. It costs money to fit factories with devices that reduce emissions, which could cause corporations to lay off workers. Forcing the auto industry to make more efficient vehicles that emit less greenhouse gas could reduce sales. Stricter standards could even drive fuel prices even higher.

To make things more complicated, there is an ongoing debate about how severe the effects of global warming are, or whether global warming even exists. The general scientific consensus is that it does exist, and world leaders felt it was enough of a problem to meet in Kyoto in 1997 and agree to a 33 percent reduction in the output of greenhouse gasses. There's enough room for disagreement, however, that one U.S. senator actually called global warming a hoax.

Badnarik: Position and Record
Badnarik has not expressed specific views on environmental policies.

Record:
Since Badnarik has never held a public office, he has no voting record on this issue.

Bush: Position and Record
Bush has attempted to downplay the severity of global warming, and often pits environmental issues against economic factors. In 2001, the Bush administration rejected the Kyoto agreement, saying, "For America, complying with those mandates would have a negative economic impact with layoffs of workers and price increases for consumers." Bush also disagreed with Kyoto exemptions provided for developing countries like China.

Although Bush has supported environmental efforts in speeches, he is generally considered friendly to economic interests in cases where business conflicts with the environment. He has supported voluntary environmental guidelines, rather than mandatory controls.

Record:
Bush rejected the Kyoto agreement in 2001. He also supported weaker enforcement of the Clean Air Act. In his 2000 campaign, Bush promised to regulate CO2 emission, but in 2001 he decided not to support the regulation of CO2 from power plants. In the 2000 debates, Bush disputed the severity of global warming.

In 2003, Bush announced a $1.2 billion initiative to fund the development of hydrogen fuel technologies. He declared that U.S. greenhouse emissions would be reduced by 18 percent within 10 years.

Kerry: Position and Record
Kerry has established himself as the antithesis of Bush when it comes to global warming. He disputes the "environment versus economy" adage -- on his campaign Web site, he slams the Bush administration's "outdated, old-economy notions that our environment must be sacrificed in the name of short-term profit." In fact, he feels that the U.S.'s absence from ongoing international discussions on how to reduce emissions is actually hurting the U.S. economy.

If elected, Kerry plans to "reinsert" the U.S. into international environmental treaties, and he supports emissions trading. Under an emissions trading plan, a factory would have a set quota of "free" emissions. To emit greenhouse gases above that amount, they would have to purchase additional emitting quota from other companies. It is hoped that this would make reducing emissions financially attractive to a variety of industries.

Record:

  • 2003 - Voted yes to a law encouraging the production of hydrogen-powered vehicles
  • 2002 - Voted yes to the Securing America's Future Energy (SAFE) Act, which encouraged the use of alternative fuels and new auto emission standards
  • 2001 - Voted no to the appointment of Gale Norton (known to oppose environmental regulations) as secretary of the interior
  • 1996 - Voted yes to increase funding for various environmental programs, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
  • 1993 - Voted yes to create a Department of Environment and a Presidential Commission on Improving Environmental Protection

Nader: Position and Record
Although Nader dismisses the Kyoto Protocol as being too "watered-down" to make a big difference, he still wants the U.S. to ratify the agreement and begin work on reducing emissions. He has specifically called for:

  • Reducing auto emissions, and holding SUVs to the same environmental standards as cars
  • Increasing the use of alternative fuels, and therefore reducing use of fossil fuels
  • Eliminating subsidies of fossil fuel development

Record:
Because Nader has never held a political office, he has no voting record on global warming.

Sources: