9 Reasons a John McCain Presidency Would be a Disaster for the Environment

Republican presidential nominee John McCain may be doing all he can to present himself as a green candidate, but don’t believe the hype. McCain’s efforts to brand himself as a steward of the environment simply don’t mesh with the man’s own life, viewpoints and voting history, and offering a line of eco-friendly merchandise isn’t going to change that.

A McCain presidency would be an utter disaster for the environment, especially in terms of the fight against global warming and the emerging renewable energy industry. If you care about any of these things, here are 9 reasons that should keep you from voting for McCain in November.

9. He’s shown a fundamental lack of understanding about important concepts related to the environment, from energy to conservation. McCain’s campaign ridiculed Barack Obama when the Democratic presidential nominee stated that if everyone kept their vehicles properly maintained, including keeping tires properly inflated, we could save as much energy as offshore drilling would produce. However, Obama was right.

Despite claiming that he’s a conservationist in the vein of Theodore Roosevelt, McCain has shown a staggering lack of understanding about conservation issues. In his haste to display a ‘tough stance’ on earmarks, McCain derided efforts to fund a study on grizzly bear populations in Montana as an example of congressional excess. He oversimplified and mischaracterized the bill as an ‘expensive bear paternity test’ that would cost $3 million dollars to “study the DNA of bears in Montana”. The study, in fact, was needed to protect these endangered animals by surveying their populations. This is far from the only example of McCain’s failure to live up to his carefully crafted ‘environmentalist’ image – he has earned a lifetime League of Conservation Voters score of just 24 out of 100, including a 2007 score of 0.

McCain is also completely out of touch with technology. At a town hall meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on December 6th of last year, McCain stated that “the truly green technologies don’t work”, claiming that “most every expert that I know says that if you maximize [renewables] in every possible way,” the contribution they would make is “very small.” It shows how narrow McCain’s circle of experts really is – even the Bush administration admits that we could get most of our electricity growth over the next couple of decades from wind power alone.

Note also that he said “given the present state of technology”. That brings us to…

8. He’s not going to help green energy get off the ground – he doesn’t believe that solar, wind and other renewables need government assistance. According to him, “I’m not one who believes that we need to subsidize things. The wind industry is doing fine, the solar industry is doing fine.” And yet, his energy plan includes subsidies for getting nuclear power off the ground.

Considering that solar and wind power are cleaner, safer sources of renewable energy, it would make sense to ensure that businesses can afford to move forward with these technologies. Subsidies for wind and solar are critical for projects like the Solana Generating Station, a $1 billion, 280-megawatt plant slated for construction near Gila Bend in Arizona. McCain has instead placed the priority on offshore drilling and nuclear power.

7. He’ll cave to pressure from more conservative Republicans. In the course of his campaign, McCain has moved further and further away from his original, greener, more left-leaning stances. He was once a staunch opponent of offshore drilling, but that stance slowly died an awkward death, finally succumbing completely when running mate Sarah Palin roused a chorus of “drill, baby, drill” at the GOP national convention.

Indeed, the GOP’s death grip on oil as America’s main source of energy – and their many financial and personal ties to the industry – would hardly give McCain the opportunity to accomplish anything substantial in the environmental arena. Despite the fact that he’s often held views on green issues that are unpopular with his fellow Republicans, he has taken his party’s decidedly pro-corporation, anti-environment stance on plenty of others. Whether this is due to pressure from fellow lawmakers, lobbyists or other influences is impossible to tell – McCain’s record on environmental issues is wildly erratic with no clear rhyme or reason (see #2).

As The New Republic mused back in March, “However uneven his record, it would be a real tragedy if the GOP changed McCain’s position on the environment, rather than the other way around.” Given his softening on environmental issues during the course of his campaign, it’s looking more and more likely that that’s exactly what would happen if he became President.

6. McCain’s own life shows how much personal dedication he really has to the environment. It’s the argument that conservatives have tried to use against Al Gore for years, only in this instance, it’s true. John McCain and his wife, Cindy, own 13 vehicles and somewhere between 7-12 homes, depending on who you ask. When asked by a reporter how many homes he owns, McCain wasn’t even able to provide an answer.

Climate Progress estimates that the carbon footprint of McCain’s homes to be around 150 million tons, or about 10 times that of the average American. Mind you, this isn’t counting the trips he makes back and forth between those homes on his wife’s private jet. And, somehow we doubt that McCain is powering his homes with 100% renewable energy, like Al Gore does (and for the record, Obama owns just one home and one car.)

5. He wants to build 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030. McCain claims on his website that “nuclear power is a proven, zero-emission source of energy, and it is time we recommit to advancing our use of nuclear power.” The fact is, nuclear power is unsafe and expensive – and there are better alternatives out there. A single nuclear reactor costs between $6-$8 billion to build, and shipping hazardous materials during the construction process would be extremely dangerous. Mining the uranium required to power the plants would be an environmental disaster. And then there’s the issue of disposing of nuclear waste.

We’re not wild about the fact that Obama backs nuclear power, either, but here’s an important distinction between him and McCain: Obama is cautiously supportive of nuclear energy as a small part of a comprehensive clean energy overhaul, if and only if all safety issues are addressed. Obama has said, “I have not ruled out nuclear… but only [would support it] so far as it is clean and safe.”

McCain’s stubborn insistence that nuclear power must be a major player in the clean energy of the future again affirms the fact that he’s disconnected from modern technology. He’s clinging to the energy sources of the 20th century, not looking toward the cleaner, greener energy tech of the 21st century and beyond.

4. He supports offshore drilling and falsely claims that it’s an important part of America’s short-term energy solution. In fact, offshore drilling is now a key strategy in his energy plan. McCain’s campaign has consistently sought to mislead the public about a tie between current gas prices and offshore drilling, as if offshore drilling is some magical answer. They’ve gone so far as to blame Obama for high gas prices in an attack ad, which states that “some in Washington are saying no to drilling in America… no to independence from foreign oil. Who can you thank for rising prices at the pump?” Cut to a photo of Obama. Then, “One man knows that we must now drill more in America and rescue our family budgets.”

It’s just plain not true. FactCheck.org notes of the ad, “The federal government’s estimate is that if the moratorium on offshore drilling were lifted today, it would be 2030 before we’d see a noticeable effect on supply and prices. For the same reason, it’s simply not true that drilling more now will ‘rescue our family budgets.’” But that’s exactly what McCain’s campaign is drilling into the minds of the American public – just so they’ll vote for him. We’ve got to wean ourselves off oil, period – not simply squeeze every drop we can out of America at the expense of the environment.

At least McCain doesn’t want to drill in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, right? Oh, wait – Palin does. And she’s Alaska’s governor. Umm…

3. He has given in to lobbying from the dirty energy industry time and time again. McCain has taken at least $1,069,854 from the oil & gas industry, and at least 22 top McCain advisors and fundraisers have lobbied for Big Oil at one time or another. McCain has also personally advocated for huge tax breaks for oil companies, and has voted against a windfall profit tax on oil companies multiple times. In fact, McCain has a long record of being very cozy with lobbyists. How can we trust this so-called ‘maverick’ to keep our interests in mind, and not those of the corporations he’s in bed with?

2. His record shows that he’s all talk and no action. McCain has missed dozens of important votes on environmental issues, and when he did show up, he often voted against measures that would support renewable energy. In fact, his environmental record in the Senate is aligned with that of James “global warming is a hoax” Inhofe.

McCain claims to have a long history of supporting alternative energy, but his record shows otherwise. He has missed key votes on issues like extending renewable energy tax credits, and voted against renewables at least eight times in the last decade, including the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which was the biggest congressional effort to push alternative energy in more than a decade. Even Senator Inhofe voted for it.

He has also voted to weaken requirements for energy-efficiency in appliances, voted to let coal states bypass the Clean Water Act, voted against increased EPA funding to clean up Superfund toxic-waste sites and also against requiring polluters to pay for the cleanup of Superfund sites. All in all, he has voted against clean energy and the environment (or said he would have, for those votes he missed) more than 50 times since the early 1990s. So much for being a ‘green candidate’.

1. Two words: Sarah Palin. It’s not just possible that this woman would have to take over the presidency at some point, it’s highly likely. And in the brief time we’ve known her, Palin has terrified people the world over with her narrow-minded viewpoints on a range of topics from creationism to – gulp – the environment.

Palin is so far to the right on the environment, her inclusion on the GOP ticket for this election effectively cancels out any environmental cred John McCain might have left. She supports offshore drilling anywhere, even if it doesn’t solve our energy problems. She doesn’t believe that global warming is man-made. She has opposed strengthening protection for Beluga whales in Alaska’s Cook Inlet, where oil and gas development has been proposed. She supports drilling in the ANWR, which is home to bears, gray wolves, sandhill cranes and a herd of caribou – but what does Sarah Palin care for such animals? She’s got a bear carcass in her office, regularly hunts caribou and supports shooting wolves from low-flying planes.

And finally, this about sums it up: she sued the federal government in response to polar bears being listed as endangered, because the classification that aims to protect these animals will interfere with oil drilling in Alaska’s coastal waters. Putting the oil industry before the environment: sounds familiar, doesn’t it? It’s the same old Republican policies, thinly veiled by a fading green cloak.

Related Posts:

McCain and Obama Spar on Energy, Environment During 2nd Presidential Debate
Once More, With Feeling: Palin’s Abysmal Environmental Record
‘Eco-Minded’ McCain Supports Offshore Drilling
Obama Responds to McCain’s Backfiring ‘Tire Gauge’ Attacks
John McCain is About as Green as a Barrel of Oil