Subject number two is… The Environment
The problem with the established parties on the subject of the environment is that there is so much money tied to the status quo (big oil,) that it is hard to reach the presidential stage of politics and still have the freedom to do the right thing. The right thing is to transition from fossil fuels to clean burning renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, hydrogen etc. Electric car technology is advanced enough to currently replace 86% of all miles driven today by fossil fuels. Those advances have all been made by shade-tree mechanics and tinkerers. If this country would have invested in an electric vehicle initiative years ago that figure could be nearly 100% by now.
The Bush administration has really given nothing more than lip service to the environment. In their quest for more natural resources to plunder, they have proposed new drilling and mining in reserved public lands at every turn. The problem is NOT that there is not enough energy. The problem is the current energy broker’s stranglehold on what forms of energy are available. The only thing keeping this grade from an F is the fact that they have proposed funding for hydrogen fuel-cell research. (This too is lip service and I can guarantee there will not be a wholehearted effort in the area of any new fuel forms.) His support of a ‘market based” solution to air quality issues is crazy.
John Kerry is against drilling in the Arctic and while it is a pie-in-the-sky-feel-good policy with no real way to reach the goals, he is proposing a series of goals to lower our dependence on fossil fuels. He fails however by his constant pandering to the ethanol lobby. He pushes this inefficient solution because of the financial backing to his campaign. Ethanol is NOT the solutuion – clean, renewable energy sources are REAL and need to be the focus.
This is the strongest area for Ralph Nader and the Greens. Nader supports initiatives to research renewable energy sources. In addition, he is for the removal of subsidies for companies involved in the production of fossil fuels and instead give incentives to the renewable energy entrepreneurs. While the other candidates push for tokens like Bush’s proposed 1.5 mpg increase for SUVs, Nader proposes a serious push for more efficient automobiles in terms of the energy sources used. The Greens on the other hand are much more radical in their proposals. Their whackos have made unrealistic proposals that would result in the upheaval of our economy and lifestyle for them to happen. A clear case of head-in-the-sand, unrealistic radical thinking.
Current report card. Remember, you should NOT agree with your candidate on EVERY issue. If you do, you are mindless automaton and you deserve the government you get. The only thing you can do is to do as I am doing and decide which issues are important to you and vote according to which side has a preponderance of their record in alignment with your beliefs.
Breaking these scores into numeric totals, after two issues, here are the standings…