SECOND UPDATE, Saturday 1/5: Solve Climate has updated their initial posting to reflect the fact that Senator Obama had in fact issued a December 20 statement criticizing the EPA's decision and pledging, if necessary, to overturn it as President.
UPDATE: Also worth reading is David Roberts' take on how climate change might be used, in terms of framing and potential choices, in a general election that pits Obama against ostensible environmental ally McCain.
Over at Solve Climate, David Sassoon has posted an open letter to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, challenging the Iowa caucus victor to seize the moment and elevate climate issues by pledging to overturn the EPA's California waiver ruling. While we don't agree with everything David has to say here, we're very much in agreement that this matter, and the general notion of taking action on global warming on Day One, is a no-brainer for all of the Democrats. David's point about restoring the rule of law in this instance is particularly strong, and jibes with what CRC's own Doug Kendall and Jennifer Bradley wrote in a recent article praising the Democratic candidates for seizing the mantle of the Constitution in their most recent debate.
But we'd hasten to add that this isn't just low-hanging fruit for Democrats, nor something to leave to the next President. The California waiver should be a solid issue for most of the Republican field, too, as support for the waiver transcends divisions even within the GOP. While the likes of Schwarzenegger and CT Governor Jodi Rell are generally classified as moderates, its harder to apply that label to FL Governor Charlie Crist or UT Governor Jon Hunstman (the latter came into politics from a business background), let alone presidential candidate and longtime regulatory foe Ron Paul.
Pledging to reverse the California waiver decision-- or better yet, actively support a bipartisan legislative effort to reverse it, which proponents currently fear would not survive a filibuster attempt-- should theoretically have appeal acrosss the Republican field. It's opportunity to step up to the plate not just for candidates pledging their support for climate measures and clean energy efforts, like John McCain and Mike Huckabee, but those like Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney who are working to claim the mantle of conservative constitutional principles and states' rights (the latter could even take a cue from Ron Paul's language supporting the waiver).
Quite simply put, the California waiver is a basic legal test for anyone who wants to be President, and offers politicians across the board a chance to simultaneously demonstrate their respect for the urgency of the climate crisis and the crystal-clear rule of law. The coming weeks and months will be quite the interesting grading period.
Dave Roberts's Grist post (link above) speculates that as voters consider McCain vs Obama, they might ask themselves: "Do I want the tax-averse, government-averse, war-hungry guy with a middling climate plan, or do I want the guy that's going to go big on climate?"
Putting aside the "war-hungry" reference (which, given McCain's history, is pretty despicable), one factor Roberts completely overlooks in his analysis is that voters might ask which candidate is best positioned to get significant global warming legislation through Congress, given the constraints of Senate filibuster procedures, which the current congressional leadership has found to be a sometimes difficult obstacle. Although it won't be dispositive for many voters, the ability to appeal to both parties seems relevant to the analysis, and therefore worth mentioning.
Posted by: Tim Dowling | January 05, 2008 at 08:15 AM