John Kerry: It’s Time for Action on Energy
Senator (of Massachusetts) John Kerry published a post at The Democratic Daily (where I’m helping out Pamela) about energy. Be sure to read it. I disagree with Senator Kerry on quite some issues, but energy is not one of them.
Excerpt:
It’s amazing to me that some people still refuse to see the gravity of the situation staring us in the face, with the best science telling us we may only have a decade to act before the climate crisis reaches a dangerous tipping point. But there are the same interests throwing up the same roadblocks. Take CAFE standards – I and many others are demanding that the standards be raised to 35 mpg by the end of the next decade, with light trucks and SUVs included in that and other mandatory requirements for medium and heavy trucks. And we want to close the loopholes that allow automakers to miss even those targets. But the Bush Administration has written to Congress that they are opposed to ANY numerical requirement in the statute. Think about that for a moment … they say they want fuel economy to get better, but they don’t want to put any numeric requirements about what that means. And they want medium and heavy trucks exempted from even that!
Another area where I’m pushing is to require that at least 20% of our electricity come from renewable sources by 2020. This has been a part of my energy plan since 2002, and I mentioned this over and over (and over) during the campaign in 2004. There has been significant support for this change now in Congress, but there are still the powerful interests arrayed against it.
Dogmatic refusal to consider new approaches to this crisis can have such enormous consequences, it boggles the mind how people can do it.
It is quite interesting to note that with a different Republican President, Kerry might accomplish quite some of his goals: Rudy Giuliani, for instance, has already said that he wants to do something about global warming (and related problems / issues) and wants to make America energy independent (as have quite some other candidates of course). It seems to me that, over time, the two parties will grow towards each other on this issue (it will be quite problematic if they don’t).
I am wondering what Senator Kerry’s thoughts are about that.
As I said, I agree with Kerry on this issue: it is about time that something is done about it.
UPDATE
Senator Kerry answered my question:
Michael
I welcome all efforts to fight global warming from anyone. My bill is a bipartisan bill (with Olympia Snowe), so I know there are some Republicans who believe in action on this, in fact Newt Gingrich seems to be moving in that direction, but they’re vast outnumbered by the flat-earth caucus on this issue.
Trust me, I’ve debated Jim Inhofe on this – the widespread denial of the science hasn’t abated. I’ll wait to see some action before I comment any further.
Even George Bush has said some things about dealing with global climate change, but then his Administration turns around and promises to veto anything that would move us forward.
A big thank you to the Senator for the (rapid) response. Let me just say: very true, some of them talk the talk every now and then, it’s time for those people to walk the walk as well.
11 Responses to “John Kerry: It’s Time for Action on Energy”
John Kerry, a man who owns multiple homes, multiple cars, and flies in private jet has no credibility on energy conservation. When I see Alexandra and Vanessa Kerry on the DC Metro; when I see Teresa Kerry priving a Prius, and when I see John Kerry standing in line to board coach; then John Kerry can start preaching about energy saving but not before.
Of course John Kerry would be singing a different tune if he was a Senator from Michigan.
I certainly have no objection to doing a little more greening up of things around here.
But, yes, the serious greens really ought to get it through their skulls that people who live in mansions and fly around in Gulfstreams just ain’t gonna cut it with the regular folk as spokespersons. It’s a very simple adage……walk the walk.
I think it may be misleading to say someone cannot be an effective spokesperson for such a cause because they are wealthy and as such own much more than the average American and thus use more energy. I think it more legitimate to examine the energy they use and what they are doing to reduce their personal environmental impact. Sure, if they continue to use cheap power that is almost certainly polluting, then they deserve the criticism. However, if they spend the extra money for green energy (like Al Gore does) then there is nothing to criticize.
Owning multiple homes, multiple vehicles, etc. does not disqualify a person from being a credible spokesperson. In fact, such a spokesperson is the only viable one because they are the ones who are going to be well known and thus have a powerful voice in the system, whereas your average American who is passionate about this cause does not.
As for taking mass transit or flying coach, do you really think that is actually practicable for a high profile D.C. politician? That would, I think, lead to more problems especially when dealing with security.
I had to laugh at this —
– as I would if the co-sponsor was, say, Susan Collins, Lincoln Chafee, or Arlen Specter … heh
This business of attacking the messenger rather than the message is , how can I put it politely, a deversionary tactic
The tactic implies that only poor people can have good ideas about fighting poverty, only sick people can know how to cure disease, only the depraved can speak about morality and so on.
Even if the messenger were an utter failure as far as his personal adherence to the message goes, the message can still be perfectly valid.
A lot of ex cons volunteer time to speak to youngsters about the evils of crime.
domajot,
It is not attacking the messenger. It is demanding real leadership on global warming. those who as others to cut back should be leading the way in cut back. All that people like Al Gore has done is window dressing without cutting back at all. If I need to lower my carbon footprint, then I had better see the elite in this country lowering their carbon footprint.
How about I drive what I want and just give up snow boarding in the Rockies and Senator Kerry can drive a Prius and keep on flying to the Rockies to snowboard
?
PS. Senator do not get security. If you lived in DC you will eventually run into them at restaurants, on the street, and at the airport.
SD
Sure it is SD. Own your stuff. Someone who attacks the writer of a good idea instead of engaging on the idea has no credibility.
Greendreams,
If John Kerry wants to reduce globawarming, he could have called for the elimination of private jets, he could have called for the elimination of second homes, he could have called for the elimination of business travel. But he did not because such provisions would have adversely impacted Senator Kerry and his friends.
Instead, he called for something that would not impact his lifestyle one bit but adversely impact many people in the U.S. His plan will especially hurt people who live in rural areas and working in construction and agriculture.
Once again, the first rule of leadership is never ask other people to do something you would not do yourself. John Kerry totally fails that test.
SD- Not that many people actually own second homes, so I doubt that would have any impact, and to suggest that we eliminate business travel is just plain silly- why not announce we are going to shut down our economy and put the airlines out of business while you’re at it. Any solution that has a chance of working will realistically affect just about everyone.
kritter,
The left continously talks about implementing the Kyoto protocol that would have much more negative impact of the economy than elikinating business trips. The left did seem to care about the eocnomy them. But now would want to worry about the economy as long as any changes would negatively impact the elite rich like John Kerry.
Eliminating private jets would have virtualy no bad effects on the economy except for the elimination of a few jobs and inconviencing the uber-rich. but I guess when an arrogant ass like Senator Kerry ants to reduce greenhouse gases, inconviencing the uber-rich will never be proposed.
LIke I said, when John Kerry gives up snow board in Idaho and skiing in Europe, then he can ask the rest of us to make some sacrafices.