The Green Bubble Bursts
The Green Bubble Bursts
Amid the energy crisis, Democrats are losing the high ground on the
environment to a GOP that is pushing oil drilling.
By Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger
September 30, 2008
As the election enters its endgame, Democrats and their environmental allies
face a political challenge they could hardly have imagined just a few months
ago. America's growing dependence on fossil fuels, once viewed as a
Democratic trump card held alongside the Iraq war and the deflating economy,
has become a lodestone instead. Republicans stole the energy issue from
Democrats by proposing expanded drilling -- particularly lifting bans on
offshore oil drilling -- to bring down gasoline prices. Whereas Barack Obama
told Americans to properly inflate their tires, Republicans at their
convention gleefully chanted "Drill, baby, drill!" Obama's point on
conservation and efficiency was lost on an electorate eager for a solution
to what they perceive as a supply crisis.
Democrats and greens ended up in this predicament because they believed
their own press clippings -- or, perhaps more accurately, Al Gore's. After
the release of the documentary film and book "An Inconvenient Truth," greens
convinced themselves that U.S. public opinion on climate change had shifted
dramatically, despite having no empirical evidence that was the case. In
fact, public concern about global warming was about the same before the
movie -- 65% told a Gallup poll in 2007 that global warming was a somewhat
or very important concern in comparison to 63% in 1989. Global warming
remains a low-priority issue, hovering near the bottom of the Pew Center for
People and the Press' top 20 priorities.
By contrast, public concern about gasoline and energy prices has shifted
dramatically. While liberals and environmentalists were congratulating
themselves on the triumph of climate science over fossil-fuel-funded
ignorance, planning inauguration parties and writing legislation for the
next Democratic president and Congress, gas prices became the second-highest
concern after the economy, according to Gallup.
This summer, elite opinion ran headlong into American popular opinion. The
train wreck happened in the Senate and went by the name of the Climate
Security Act. That bill to cap U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would have, by
all accounts (even the authors'), increased gasoline and energy prices.
Despite clear evidence that energy-price anxiety was rising, Democrats
brought the bill to the Senate floor in June when gas prices were well over
$4 a gallon in most of the country. Republicans were all too happy to join
that fight.
Indeed, they so relished the opportunity to accuse Democrats of raising
gasoline prices in the midst of an energy crisis, they insisted that the
500-page bill be read into the Senate record in its entirety in order to
prolong the debate. Within days, Senate Democrats started jumping ship.
Democratic leaders finally killed the debate to avert an embarrassing
defeat, but by then they had handed Republicans a powerful political club.
Republicans have been bludgeoning Democrats with it ever since. They held
dramatic "hearings," unauthorized by the Democratic leadership, on the need
for expanded oil drilling to lower gas prices. Former House Speaker Newt
Gingrich quickly announced a book, "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less," a
movie and a petition drive. And Republican presidential candidate John
McCain stopped making speeches about his support for bipartisan climate
action, which is how he had started his campaign, and attacked Obama and
congressional Democrats for opposing drilling instead.
On June 9, three days after the emissions cap-and-trade bill died in the
Senate, Obama led McCain by eight points, according to Gallup. By June 24,
the race was in a dead heat, a shift owed in no small part to Republicans
battering Democrats on energy. Seeing the writing on the wall, Obama
reversed his opposition to drilling in August, and congressional Democrats
quickly followed suit.
But the damage has largely been done. In following greens, Democrats allowed
McCain and Republicans to cast them as the party out of touch with the
pocketbook concerns of middle-class Americans and captive to special
interests that prioritize remote wilderness over economic prosperity.
In a tacit acknowledgment of their defeat, some green leaders, such as the
Sierra Club's Carl Pope, have endorsed the Democrats' pro-drilling strategy.
But few of them seem to realize the political implications. The most
influential environmental groups in Washington -- the Natural Resources
Defense Council and the Environmental Defense Fund -- are continuing to bet
the farm on a strategy that relies on emissions limits and other regulations
aimed at making fossil fuels more expensive in order to encourage
conservation, efficiency and renewable energy. But with an economic
recession likely, and energy prices sure to remain high for years to come
thanks to expanding demand in China and other developing countries, any
strategy predicated centrally on making fossil fuels more expensive is
doomed to failure.
A better approach is to make clean energy cheap through technology
innovation funded directly by the federal government. In contrast to raising
energy prices, investing somewhere between $30 billion and $50 billion
annually in technology R&D, infrastructure and transmission lines to bring
power from windy and sunny places to cities is overwhelmingly popular with
voters. Instead of embracing this big investment, greens and Democrats push
instead for tiny tax credits for renewable energy -- nothing approaching the
national commitment that's needed.
With just six weeks before the election, the bursting of the green bubble is
a wake-up call for Democrats. Environmental groups, perpetually certain that
a new ecological age is about to dawn in America, have serially
overestimated their strength and misread public opinion. Democrats must
break once and for all from green orthodoxy that focuses primarily on making
dirty energy more expensive and instead embrace a strategy to make clean
energy cheap.
By continuing to hew to the green agenda, Democrats have not only put in
jeopardy their chance of taking back the White House and growing their
majority in Congress, they also have set back the prospects of establishing
policies that might effectively address the climate and energy crises.
Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger are authors of "Break Through: From
the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility" and
co-founders of the Breakthrough Institute.
Amid the energy crisis, Democrats are losing the high ground on the
environment to a GOP that is pushing oil drilling.
By Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger
September 30, 2008
As the election enters its endgame, Democrats and their environmental allies
face a political challenge they could hardly have imagined just a few months
ago. America's growing dependence on fossil fuels, once viewed as a
Democratic trump card held alongside the Iraq war and the deflating economy,
has become a lodestone instead. Republicans stole the energy issue from
Democrats by proposing expanded drilling -- particularly lifting bans on
offshore oil drilling -- to bring down gasoline prices. Whereas Barack Obama
told Americans to properly inflate their tires, Republicans at their
convention gleefully chanted "Drill, baby, drill!" Obama's point on
conservation and efficiency was lost on an electorate eager for a solution
to what they perceive as a supply crisis.
Democrats and greens ended up in this predicament because they believed
their own press clippings -- or, perhaps more accurately, Al Gore's. After
the release of the documentary film and book "An Inconvenient Truth," greens
convinced themselves that U.S. public opinion on climate change had shifted
dramatically, despite having no empirical evidence that was the case. In
fact, public concern about global warming was about the same before the
movie -- 65% told a Gallup poll in 2007 that global warming was a somewhat
or very important concern in comparison to 63% in 1989. Global warming
remains a low-priority issue, hovering near the bottom of the Pew Center for
People and the Press' top 20 priorities.
By contrast, public concern about gasoline and energy prices has shifted
dramatically. While liberals and environmentalists were congratulating
themselves on the triumph of climate science over fossil-fuel-funded
ignorance, planning inauguration parties and writing legislation for the
next Democratic president and Congress, gas prices became the second-highest
concern after the economy, according to Gallup.
This summer, elite opinion ran headlong into American popular opinion. The
train wreck happened in the Senate and went by the name of the Climate
Security Act. That bill to cap U.S. greenhouse gas emissions would have, by
all accounts (even the authors'), increased gasoline and energy prices.
Despite clear evidence that energy-price anxiety was rising, Democrats
brought the bill to the Senate floor in June when gas prices were well over
$4 a gallon in most of the country. Republicans were all too happy to join
that fight.
Indeed, they so relished the opportunity to accuse Democrats of raising
gasoline prices in the midst of an energy crisis, they insisted that the
500-page bill be read into the Senate record in its entirety in order to
prolong the debate. Within days, Senate Democrats started jumping ship.
Democratic leaders finally killed the debate to avert an embarrassing
defeat, but by then they had handed Republicans a powerful political club.
Republicans have been bludgeoning Democrats with it ever since. They held
dramatic "hearings," unauthorized by the Democratic leadership, on the need
for expanded oil drilling to lower gas prices. Former House Speaker Newt
Gingrich quickly announced a book, "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less," a
movie and a petition drive. And Republican presidential candidate John
McCain stopped making speeches about his support for bipartisan climate
action, which is how he had started his campaign, and attacked Obama and
congressional Democrats for opposing drilling instead.
On June 9, three days after the emissions cap-and-trade bill died in the
Senate, Obama led McCain by eight points, according to Gallup. By June 24,
the race was in a dead heat, a shift owed in no small part to Republicans
battering Democrats on energy. Seeing the writing on the wall, Obama
reversed his opposition to drilling in August, and congressional Democrats
quickly followed suit.
But the damage has largely been done. In following greens, Democrats allowed
McCain and Republicans to cast them as the party out of touch with the
pocketbook concerns of middle-class Americans and captive to special
interests that prioritize remote wilderness over economic prosperity.
In a tacit acknowledgment of their defeat, some green leaders, such as the
Sierra Club's Carl Pope, have endorsed the Democrats' pro-drilling strategy.
But few of them seem to realize the political implications. The most
influential environmental groups in Washington -- the Natural Resources
Defense Council and the Environmental Defense Fund -- are continuing to bet
the farm on a strategy that relies on emissions limits and other regulations
aimed at making fossil fuels more expensive in order to encourage
conservation, efficiency and renewable energy. But with an economic
recession likely, and energy prices sure to remain high for years to come
thanks to expanding demand in China and other developing countries, any
strategy predicated centrally on making fossil fuels more expensive is
doomed to failure.
A better approach is to make clean energy cheap through technology
innovation funded directly by the federal government. In contrast to raising
energy prices, investing somewhere between $30 billion and $50 billion
annually in technology R&D, infrastructure and transmission lines to bring
power from windy and sunny places to cities is overwhelmingly popular with
voters. Instead of embracing this big investment, greens and Democrats push
instead for tiny tax credits for renewable energy -- nothing approaching the
national commitment that's needed.
With just six weeks before the election, the bursting of the green bubble is
a wake-up call for Democrats. Environmental groups, perpetually certain that
a new ecological age is about to dawn in America, have serially
overestimated their strength and misread public opinion. Democrats must
break once and for all from green orthodoxy that focuses primarily on making
dirty energy more expensive and instead embrace a strategy to make clean
energy cheap.
By continuing to hew to the green agenda, Democrats have not only put in
jeopardy their chance of taking back the White House and growing their
majority in Congress, they also have set back the prospects of establishing
policies that might effectively address the climate and energy crises.
Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger are authors of "Break Through: From
the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility" and
co-founders of the Breakthrough Institute.
Add a Comment
© 2009 Created by Pete Land on Ning. Create Your Own Social Network
You need to be a member of The Wild Gift Leader Network to add comments!
Join this social network