Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Environment

November's Most Crucial Enviro Elections

By Amanda Griscom Little, Grist.org. Posted October 14, 2006.


Focus on November's gubernatorial races if you want to see change in America's eco-policies.
Advertisement

While the Mark Foley mess has everyone's attention riveted on the fast-changing congressional landscape, enviros should also keep an eye on gubernatorial races this November.

"The state level is where all the truly positive environmental action has been happening in recent years," says Tony Massaro, senior vice president for political affairs with the D.C.-based League of Conservation Voters. This year, for the first time, LCV is channeling money to state conservation voter leagues to help them campaign for green gubernatorial candidates. "Governors occupy the executive branch, which means they can push for positive environmental change whether they've got a favorable legislature or not," Massaro says.

The Sierra Club is also putting national funds toward governors' races for the first time this year. "We decided that since the best policies are being made at the state level, that's where we should be doing our politics as well," says Sierra Club's national political director, Cathy Duvall. In a few states, including Pennsylvania and Michigan, the group is putting more resources into gubernatorial campaigns than congressional ones.

Examples of ambitious state-level environmental initiatives are legion: Twenty-two states have implemented a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) mandating that a certain percentage of electricity come from clean sources such as solar and wind. Ten states have followed California's lead in adopting clean-car legislation requiring new automobiles to have lower greenhouse-gas emissions starting in the 2009 model year. Seven states in the Northeast have joined the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative committing to carbon dioxide reductions of 10 percent by 2019. And California has, of course, outdone all the rest by becoming the first state in the nation to impose mandatory caps on greenhouse-gas emissions.

Companies loath to deal with a patchwork of differing state greenhouse-gas rules are increasingly calling for federal-level solutions that would give them more clarity and certainty. "Essentially, leadership at the state level is, via industry, calling Washington to action," says Duvall. That makes governors with bold green vision all the more important.

Muckraker brings you a roundup of the most environmentally significant gubernatorial races in two parts: This week we'll focus on key states along the Eastern seaboard -- New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Florida -- and next week we'll cover states in the heartland and the West.

New York: Eliot Spitzer (D) vs. John Faso

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Eliot Spitzer has never been shy about where he stands on environmental protection -- or anything else. "George Bush is, hands down, the worst president on environmental and energy issues that this country has ever seen," the pugnacious Spitzer spouted during the first big environmental speech of his campaign. As New York's attorney general, he's sued the Bush administration numerous times over environmental issues, including greenhouse-gas emissions, mercury pollution from power plants, pesticide use in public housing, and efficiency standards for appliances.

Spitzer has taken plenty of polluters to court, too. Among his many victories, he forced six New York power plants to radically cut emissions that cause acid rain and smog, achieving reductions equivalent to removing 2.5 million cars from the road. He was also the first AG to sue operators of coal-fired power plants in other states, arguing that their pollution blows into New York and contaminates the air breathed by his constituents.

Enviros are gleeful over Spitzer's 46-point lead in the polls against Republican candidate John Faso, former minority leader of the state Assembly. They see Spitzer as one of the strongest environmental champions politics has produced in decades. One hundred and one leading environmental activists and green-leaning celebs have joined together to endorse Spitzer, from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Bill McKibben to Chevy Chase and Pete Seeger. "Combating global warming, cleaning up the Hudson River, and closing Indian Point [nuclear plant] are all issues that I know he will effectively address," Kennedy said in a statement. "If anyone can solve these issues, it's Eliot Spitzer."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: gubernatorial, election06, environmentalism, enviro

Amanda Griscom Little writes the Muckraker column for Grist Magazine.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
All Elections This Year Are Crucial To the Environment
Posted by: Douglas on Oct 14, 2006 5:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The environmental situation has reached a crisis point and we perhaps can "save" it if needed action is taken within the next decade. After that it will probably be too late, if it is not too late already. What is clearly needed is control of the U.S. Congress and state legislatures, as well as the presidency and the governorships of the vatrious states, by serious environmentalists who plan to do what is necessary to get us back on the right track. I wish that a Democratic majority in Congress would mean serious action would be taken to save the environment. It won't!!! Furthermore, singling out a few elections and arguing that these are the "most crucial" to the environment, as this piece does, makes little sense. We need serious across the board action and we need it now. Electing a few more business as usual Democrats will mean virtually nothing in terms of saving the environment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sprawl
Posted by: edith on Oct 14, 2006 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I like the article's purpose which is to call attention to the role of states in protection of health and nature. State and local govt is the most practical fora for stopping problems before they blow out of control, and for community participation.

The paragraphs on Maryland highlighted the sprawl issue. In particular, this is a driver of congestion, pollution, mental health issues and destruction of traditional communities.

Both Democrats and Republicans on the local level are susceptible to influence from builders, the highway industry and developers of all sorts, including foreign investors.

I would suggest that each reader of this site ascertain the position on uncontrolled sprawl of every local candidate and official. Know who the hombuilders and shopping center developers including WalMart back. Find out who in the community stands up to these destroyers of the environment and communities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Seconded, plus some links Posted by: JohnF
Pure B.S.!
Posted by: hot_rad_man on Oct 14, 2006 8:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No Democrat will bother with the evironment. All politicians are tied to the Military Industrial Complex who help them get elected. Their fortunes depend on towing the corporate line. If you vote you are a fool and are wasting your time. This system must be derailed and all politicians must be driven from Washington in buses to some remote prison where they can do no harm. DON'T VOTE! Wait till the process collapses and then let's team up with Hugo Chavez for a Socialist Revolution in America! Viva La Revolucion!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pure B.S.! Posted by: nickptar
And what about legalizing hemp? Another BIG GOVERNMENT BS article putting party over principle !
Posted by: NDnative on Oct 14, 2006 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any Democrat listed in the article plan on trying? Hemp can save both the economy and the environment at large and unlike many other crops, it doesn't hog up soil and can even grow in the desert ! And it can completely get the US the hell out of dependence on petroleum !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why don't the Dems run on 9/11 truth?
Posted by: rwa on Oct 14, 2006 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Polling Data:

When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?


Telling the truth
16% Oct. 2006
21% May 2002

Hiding something
53% Oct. 2006
65% May 2002

Mostly lying
28% Oct. 2006
8% May 2002

Not sure
3% Oct. 2006
6% May 2002

Source: The New York Times / CBS News
-----------------------

In case you missed it the title is facetious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Edith you are beyond help, this is my last response to you!
Posted by: hot_rad_man on Oct 14, 2006 12:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No, I do not have a Citgo franchise but I idolize Hugo Chavez and I would leave America in a heartbeat to be in his country to see the marvels he has done there! But, the Social Security System will take away my retirement checks that I worked my ass off for all my life and I could never survive so I am a prisoner in this horrible excuse for a country and I hate America for that!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a DC burbs dweller..
Posted by: sgtmartin1 on Oct 14, 2006 4:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and resident of Md., I can say for certain a lot rides on Nov. 7. The sprawl is appalling. A few words about what life is like in a place completely taken over by traffic.

I’ve lived at my current residence for ten years and in that time there have been at least 15 road fatalities and countless serious injuries within a one-mile radius of my home (that’s just the ones I know about).

Note: this is a fairly fashionable neighborhood. If those people had died of crime, there would be a curfew and special police task force dispatched.

I recently witnessed an accident at a notorious nearby intersection and called 9-1-1. As I reported it, I noted to the operator that she was probably familiar with the intersection. She replied “it’s just a question of how many times a day.” They are literally creating four-way stop intersections with eight lanes of incoming traffic. It is simply nuts—it is ruining the quality of life.

I can only hope that replacing my Governor will help open eyes in Annapolis.

New on EWM: Alms for the Pure reflections on the Nickel Mines massacre.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"...he has the courage to implement it."
Posted by: Sojourner on Oct 14, 2006 9:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope I will be hearing the word "coward" in more of the campaigning that's being done this year.

Our politicians, with few exceptions, are lily-livered cowards. They won't face down the scandalous rip-off that Americans have suffered since the Reagan Convolution (read Kevin Phillips, a Republican, a Nixon staffer, who writes about how since Ronnie we have seen the largest transfer of wealth to the rich ever in US history).

Why aren't we naming the names of those who refuse to support long-established American principles and policies. It was cowardly of Bush to opt out of the nuclear proliferation treaty. It was cowardly of Bush to send troops to invade a country that was zero threat. It is cowardly of the Demos in Congress to sit quietly and let the Big Coward have his way.

The only ones who are not cowards are our military on the front lines, risking their lives following cowardly orders.

Thank you for pointing out who has courage, because without that information, I'd never know there were any more than a handful--that's five or maybe a few more--of member of Congress who do not deserve to be labeled cowards.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

opportunity
Posted by: rsaxto on Oct 15, 2006 1:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have the opportunity to unseat the scoundrels and the scoundrels have the opportunity to falsify the results and remain in power as happened in previous "elections". If the latter turns out to be the case we then have the opportunity to boycott the results and refuse to be governed by the scoundrels. A nonviolent civil war, anyone? Ten million people in concentration camps, anyone?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]