{"id":7515,"date":"2020-10-26T10:43:19","date_gmt":"2020-10-26T14:43:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/?p=7515"},"modified":"2025-02-06T13:57:45","modified_gmt":"2025-02-06T18:57:45","slug":"vote-to-save-the-world","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/2020\/10\/26\/vote-to-save-the-world\/","title":{"rendered":"Vote to Save the World"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\u201cThis recent relentless rise<\/a> in CO2 shows a remarkably constant relationship with fossil-fuel burning”.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In 2009 climate activist Bill McKibben\u2019s group 350.org had a day of action with rallies all around the world \u2013 sending the message that we need to keep the level of carbon dioxide lower than 350 ppm. It\u2019s now approaching 420.<\/p>\n

As a lifelong environmentalist people sometimes tell me that they really care about the environment but don\u2019t know what they can do.\u00a0 This leads to discussions about flying less, buying less-polluting machines and products, recycling, eating less meat.\u00a0 But nothing compares to the good every American citizen can do this Fall.\u00a0 This is not a political blog.\u00a0 There have been many Republicans we should respect for their environmental commitment.\u00a0 But at this historic moment the environmental citizen must take sides and must vote to save the world.\u00a0 If we vote wrong, we can expect more descent into the abyss.<\/p>\n

A National Academy of Sciences study just found that the number of people exposed to \u201cextreme heat\u201d in cities will sharply increase (by a factor of 12.7\u201329.5 by 2100) if we continue to fail to restrict greenhouse gases.[1]\u00a0 We are seeing the West in wildfire emergencies every summer now.[2]\u00a0 Hurricane Laura just caused from $8 \u2013 12 billion in damage,[3] but the fire at the Biolab plant in Lake Charles, Louisiana should make us think about all those facilities refining oil and producing chemicals on the Gulf\u00a0Coast.[4]\u00a0 It\u2019s one thing to have your house flooded, it\u2019s another when the flood waters and the air are toxic.\u00a0 Global warming is not just about Greenland melting. It\u2019s about all hell breaking loose.<\/p>\n

\u200bI was recently asked if there is a real difference between the current presidential nominees, or if they really aren\u2019t all the same in being beholden to corporate interests. \u00a0As an educator I strive very hard to avoid partisanship.\u00a0 I do not consider my role as helping a political party.\u00a0 I believe fervently that liberals need to understand honest conservative concerns about proposed changes, and that conservatives need to respect the hopes for greater justice that liberals express.\u00a0 I have spent my life trying to mediate between extremes \u2013 and have been successful an astonishing number of times.\u00a0 I believe in the vital center.\u00a0 But at this particular point in history, it is necessary to see and say that the very survival of life itself depends on people opening their eyes and voting this current Administration out of office.\u00a0 Trump is a wrecking ball and Biden offers a chance to save what\u2019s left. I am a partisan in defense of the Earth and I call on all of Nature\u2019s children to stand up for her, and themselves, as well.\u00a0 We have the vote and we can use it to save the world.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

I have many criticisms of Democrats.\u00a0 As a party they have failed to sufficiently control corporate damage to the environment.\u00a0 There has recently been concern because the Democratic National Committee dropped the part of their platform that reflected candidate Biden and Harris\u2019 promises to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.[5]\u00a0 I can understand their wanting to shore up votes in certain states like Texas, but I would rather see them go all-in on the plan to generate jobs with investments in wind, solar, net-zero buildings, clean transportation, and local food.\u00a0 I would rather see them continue to fill out the vision of a healthy country with strong local economies powered by clean local energy.\u00a0 I would rather see them more fully articulate the possibilities, and not hedge their bets. The time for weak defense of the planet is over.\u00a0 To turn a phrase around, the best offense now is a strong defense.<\/p>\n

But even though I would wish the Democrats to be stronger in defense of what must now be done, and even though I seek to avoid politics in this educational blog, this is no time to mince words: there is no comparison between the parties and anyone who says it makes no difference ignores reality.\u00a0 The reality is that the Republicans have not only catered to the fossil fuel interests to generate campaign contributions but they have been complicit in the pernicious campaigns of falsehood that have delayed the action we need.\u00a0 Because of the hundreds of millions spent to foster denial of climate change[6] many Americans either believe climate change is a hoax, as the President has stated, or that it\u2019s not clear humans have caused it, or that we should do anything about it.\u00a0 The fossil fuel industry has outspent the renewables industry 13 to 1,[7] and the vast bulk of their money has gone to Republicans.\u00a0 In just the last year the President has received nearly $1.5 million from oil and gas interests, and 17 of the top twenty recipients, each receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars, were all Republicans.[8] Meanwhile Democrats have sworn they won\u2019t accept such donations.<\/p>\n

In the summer of 2019 the Washington Post reported that many Democrats did in fact receive money from interests they said they opposed.[9]\u00a0 According to the Center for Responsive Politics, our top Democrat contenders were among the top twenty recipients of oil and gas money in the 2019-20 election cycle.\u00a0 Joe Biden accepted nearly $400,000 and Bernie Sanders accepted nearly $241,000.[10]\u00a0 Although Democrats have generally been able to claim that the donations they\u2019ve received have not violated narrowly defined pledges, as many are from individuals and not registered lobbyists, and some returns have been made, anyone who wants to claim that they are hypocritical or tainted can find evidence to tar them. But is the question whether our representatives are pure?\u00a0 We live in a time when they are forced to raise money to reach people with their messages.\u00a0 The question is which candidate will try to help save the world.<\/p>\n

One Will, One Won\u2019t<\/h4>\n

The candidate who supports investment in clean energy is the one who will give our planet a chance.\u00a0 That candidate is Joe Biden.\u00a0 He knows that the transition to clean energy will generate many more jobs than are kept by maintaining the status quo.[11]\u00a0 The president is willing to increase the risks of climate change \u2013 and every other environmental emergency we face \u2013 in order to benefit those that contribute to his campaign.[12]\u00a0\u00a0We can expect if he is reelected that we will be led down into the abyss of ever hotter, more furious, more hellish weather,\u00a0 His encouragement of magical thinking, denying the reality of what is happening so that we can avoid having to reckon with it, is an irresponsibility that will go down in history to our everlasting shame.[13]\u00a0 Joe Biden was a key player in the Administration that worked to improve fuel economy standards, to address methane emissions from drilling (methane is an extremely powerful global warmer), to preserve wildlands and wildlife, to promote solar, wind, and green building.\u00a0 For those who say the Obama Administration did not do enough, Biden\u2019s recent support for the Green New Deal shows he is moving more assertively.\u00a0 In addition to rejoining the world effort to fight climate change, he has promised to invest hundreds of billions in clean energy and to undo the damage Trump has done to environmental laws, and to do this in a way that will not cost people their livelihood but create 10 million jobs.[14]\u00a0 He picked Kamala Harris, who started an environmental justice unit in the California Attorney General\u2019s Office, fought oil and chemical companies,[15] and was the lead sponsor on the Senate\u2019s Climate Equity bill.[16]\u00a0 Mr. Trump makes no such promises.\u00a0 He has remained obstinately defiant, refusing responsibility for the pandemic, the economy, democratic processes, truth, ethics, and respect, and most unfortunately for all life forms, the environment. \u00a0To say that these candidates are the same is to assume that both mean exactly the opposite of what they say, and that neither will continue to act as they have.<\/p>\n

Because Democrats sometimes support corporations, needing their support to get elected, and knowing that they make up most of our current economy, some think they are just as bad as the Republicans.\u00a0 But that\u2019s like saying that getting a little dirt on your face is the same as being drowned in a mudslide.\u00a0 The current administration has worked harder than any previous one to lift all restraints on businesses, and has created a vast swamp of corruption after promising to drain it.[17]\u00a0 As just one example, look at how much has been done to help Robert Murray, until recently head of the failing Murray Energy coal company: Murray gave Trump hundreds of thousands of dollars and a list of actions Trump should take to make life easier for the coal industry, which Trump then worked hard to do.[18]<\/p>\n

Tearing Down the System<\/h4>\n

But Trump has done much worse than simple everyday corruption.\u00a0 He has worked hard to tear down the entire environmental protection system that could keep us from destroying nature, the source of all our wealth and prospects for happiness.<\/p>\n

There are a number of \u201cregulatory rollback trackers\u201d that concerned citizens can use to keep up with the damage the current administration is wreaking: the New York Times tracks 95, Harvard Law School tracks about 80 rollbacks of environmental and energy law.[19]\u00a0 Columbia University Law School counts 158 actions the administration has taken to weaken climate law.[20] \u00a0Nothing like this has ever happened before.\u00a0 The Institute for Policy Integrity tracks the monetary estimates of the benefits we are losing with the weakening of environmental and public health law.[21]\u00a0 Just one example tells the story: Obama\u2019s signature climate action, the Clean Power Plan, which Trump voided as one of his first acts, would have given us an estimated NET Benefit (taking costs into account) of $49 billion, and that doesn\u2019t include the benefits they didn\u2019t calculate in terms of money: health benefits from reductions in ambient nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2), health benefits from reductions of mercury deposition, ecosystem benefits associated with emissions reductions, reduced visibility impairment.\u00a0 These would have been in addition to fighting climate change.\u00a0 Because of Trump, we have now not only dropped out of the world effort to save our atmosphere and keep us from unbearable heat, disastrous wildfires, frighteningly powerful storms, destroyed coral reefs, melting ice sheets, lost coastal zones, and accelerating extinctions, but we also have a far bigger load of contaminants like mercury poured into the air by coal plants, which gets into everything and makes us sicker.\u00a0 That wasn\u2019t even included in the official quantitative estimate, nor was our shame or disgust.<\/p>\n

Losing Balance<\/h4>\n

Contrast this analysis with the 2017 Commerce Department report on streamlining regulation that estimated the costs that regulations impose on businesses.\u00a0 The report estimated that regulations (mostly environmental) are costing American businesses $136 billion a year.[22]\u00a0 Look hard for any mention that these regulations have any purpose, or provide any benefits \u2013 you won\u2019t find it.\u00a0 They want you to think that government just hobbles good old job-providing businesses for no reason.\u00a0 Since Nixon, Republicans have promoted strict cost-benefit analysis to slow down or prevent regulations that couldn\u2019t be said to provide more benefit than cost.\u00a0 Democratic administrations also used cost-benefit analysis, but with a key difference: they might allow a regulation to go forward even if it did impose significant costs, because they recognized the limits of putting a dollar figure on the value of life.\u00a0 They also recognized that it\u2019s morally wrong to equate costs a dirty business has to bear with the cost of ordinary people being poisoned.\u00a0 But the Trump Administration has dispensed completely with balancing costs and benefits.\u00a0 The\u00a0 Commerce Report is only concerned with reducing costs to businesses, without regard to whether they are making money from polluting our world.[23]<\/p>\n

Losing Science<\/h4>\n

The Trump Administration is not just rolling back specific rules that protect public health and the environment we need to prosper and survive, but it is making it harder to get the science right \u2013 stacking science panels with industry members, making it harder to do scientific studies, pressuring scientists to keep their mouths shut, relocating employees (forcing some to quit).[24]\u00a0 Columbia University\u2019s Sabin Center has set up a \u201cSilencing Science\u201d tracker, which currently lists 200 actions to frustrate public health and environmental science.[25]\u00a0 Destroying the ability to do science that can be trusted is a crippling blow to our ability to manage our lives.<\/p>\n

Losing Protection<\/h4>\n

Trump has suspended environmental enforcement,[26] after bringing about a steep drop in enforcement actions,[27] and his proposed budget indicates that the destruction of environmental protection will continue if he is re-elected.\u00a0 It includes a 26% cut to EPA and 16% cut to Interior.[28]\u00a0 In contrast, Joe Biden will not just fight climate change but boost enforcement in hard-hit environmental justice areas, work to slow extinction rates, conserve land and water, protect parks and wilderness areas, and promote reforestation.[29]<\/p>\n

Regaining Balance, Science, Protection<\/h4>\n

Just recently, Biden came out against uranium mining near the Grand Canyon and the proposed gold mine in Bristol Bay Alaska, which could destroy the last great salmon ground, both projects that Trump is pushing. The Sierra Club is pledging double the amount to campaign for Biden than it committed to Clinton in 2016.[30]\u00a0 Biden is not perfect.\u00a0 The League of Conservation Voters only gives him an 83% lifetime score.[31]\u00a0 But his record makes clear he is not in the pocket of dirty energy.\u00a0 The League rates Congresspeople, but gives a \u201cyear-one\u201d rating for presidents.\u00a0 Trump received an F.[32]<\/p>\n

Loyalty<\/h4>\n

Once you start looking into this, there is no end to the stark contrast that you see. \u00a0If you feel loyal to the Republican party, you can show that loyalty by helping it to remember the values it once upheld.\u00a0 It may feel hard to vote against your team, but by doing so you will vote for everything else.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Rick Reibstein<\/em><\/a>, affiliated faculty with the Boston University Institute for Global Sustainability, teaches environmental law at Boston University and Harvard\u2019s Summer School. He is the founder and Director of the Regulated Community Compliance Project.<\/em><\/p>\n

Originally published by <\/em>The Environmental Citizen<\/a> blog on August 31, 2020. Republished with permission.
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Boston University Institute for Global Sustainability.<\/em><\/p>\n

[1] https:\/\/www.pnas.org\/content\/early\/2020\/08\/12\/2005492117<\/a>
\n[2] https:\/\/www.cnn.com\/2020\/08\/19\/us\/wildfires-in-the-us-by-state\/index.html<\/a>
\n[3] https:\/\/www.cnbc.com\/2020\/08\/28\/hurricane-laura-leaves-damage-in-louisiana-weakens-to-tropical-depression.html<\/a>
\n[4] https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2020\/08\/27\/climate\/hurricane-laura-fire-pollution.html<\/a>
\n[5] https:\/\/www.huffpost.com\/entry\/democratic-national-committee-climate_n_5f3c2907c5b6d8a9173f0268<\/a>
\n[6] Now that climate change has become harder to deny, \u201cThe most common tactics employed are drawing attention to low carbon, positioning the company as a climate expert and acknowledging climate concern while ignoring solutions. The report said that the campaigns are misleading the public given that the companies listed continue to expand their oil and gas extraction activities with only 3% of spending directed to low carbon projects.\u201d
\nhttps:\/\/www.forbes.com\/sites\/niallmccarthy\/2019\/03\/25\/oil-and-gas-giants-spend-millions-lobbying-to-block-climate-change-policies-infographic\/#46f6ce7f7c4f<\/a> \u2013 citing Influence Map research at https:\/\/influencemap.org\/reports\/Reports
\n[7] https:\/\/yaleclimateconnections.org\/2020\/01\/fossil-fuel-political-giving-outdistances-renewables-13-to-one\/<\/a>
\n[8] https:\/\/www.opensecrets.org\/industries\/recips.php?ind=E01++<\/a>
\n[9] https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/politics\/democrats-swore-off-donations-from-lobbyists-and-fossil-fuel-execs-but-some-are-skirting-their-own-rules\/2019\/07\/29\/7ac49a3c-ae14-11e9-b071-94a3f4d59021_story.html<\/a>
\n[10] Ibid.\u00a0 The CRP report is based on data from the Federal Elections Commission.
\n[11] \u201c\u2026decarbonisation of the global energy system can grow the global economy and create up to 28 million jobs in the sector by 2050\u201d. https:\/\/www.forbes.com\/sites\/mikescott\/2018\/05\/08\/clean-energy-sector-employs-more-than-10-million-for-the-first-time\/#305e685cb500<\/a>
\n[12] https:\/\/insideclimatenews.org\/news\/19042017\/fossil-fuels-oil-coal-gas-exxon-chevron-bp-donald-trump-inauguration-donations<\/a>
\n[13] Some research, in contrast, shows that denialism can be addressed: “Based on our research, decreasing inefficacy\u2014the belief that “I can’t make a difference’ \u2013 and promoting social norms, are some of the most effective ways to encourage action on climate.” https:\/\/phys.org\/news\/2020-02-climate-denialism.html<\/a>
\n[14] https:\/\/joebiden.com\/9-key-elements-of-joe-bidens-plan-for-a-clean-energy-revolution\/#<\/a>
\n[15] Harris was a leader in beating back attempts to preempt state laws to protect citizens from toxic chemicals when changes were made to the Toxic Substances Control Act.
\n[16] https:\/\/www.pri.org\/stories\/2020-08-26\/biden-harris-ticket-highlights-historic-stance-climate-and-environmental-justice<\/a>
\n[17] https:\/\/prospect.org\/power\/mapping-corruption-donald-trump-executive-branch\/<\/a>
\n[18] See Frontline\u2019s \u201cWar on EPA\u201d: https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wgbh\/frontline\/article\/bob-murray-helped-shape-trumps-energy-policies-now-his-coal-company-is-facing-bankruptcy\/<\/a>
\n[19] https:\/\/eelp.law.harvard.edu\/2018\/07\/tracking-the-trackers\/
\n[20] https:\/\/climate.law.columbia.edu\/climate-deregulation-tracker<\/a>
\n[21] https:\/\/policyintegrity.org\/documents\/Benefits_at_Stake.pdf<\/a>
\n[22] https:\/\/www.commerce.gov\/news\/reports\/streamlining-permitting-and-reducing-regulatory-burdens-domestic-manufacturing<\/a>
\n[23] https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/us-news\/2020\/aug\/09\/big-oil-trump-campaign-donations-fossil-fuel-industry<\/a>
\n[24] https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2019\/12\/28\/climate\/trump-administration-war-on-science.html<\/a>
\n[25] https:\/\/climate.law.columbia.edu\/Silencing-Science-Tracker<\/a>
\n[26] https:\/\/insideclimatenews.org\/news\/27032020\/coronavirus-covid-19-EPA-API-environmental-enforcement<\/a>
\n[27] https:\/\/truthout.org\/articles\/the-epa-has-backed-off-enforcement-under-trump-here-are-the-numbers\/<\/a>
\n[28] https:\/\/thehill.com\/policy\/energy-environment\/482352-trump-budget-slashes-funding-for-epa-environmental-programs<\/a>
\n[29] https:\/\/joebiden.com\/climate-plan\/#<\/a>
\n[30] https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/politics\/2020\/08\/10\/biden-wins-sierra-clubs-endorsement\/<\/a>
\n[31] https:\/\/scorecard.lcv.org\/moc\/joe-biden<\/a>
\n[32] https:\/\/www.lcv.org\/trumpyearone\/<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

IGS Blog | In 2009 climate activist Bill McKibben\u2019s group 350.org had a day of action with rallies all around the world \u2013 sending the message that we need to keep the level of carbon dioxide lower than 350 ppm.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15145,"featured_media":7524,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[9],"tags":[650,267,74],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7515"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15145"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7515"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7515\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21512,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7515\/revisions\/21512"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7524"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7515"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7515"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bu.edu\/igs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7515"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}