McCain Criticizes Bush On Climate, Has Photograph Taken Near Tree - NYT

Yep, that's him, and there are some trees in the photo!

EDIT

Mr. McCain was on his second day of a trip to the Pacific Northwest, a potential swing region in the November election, to promote his plan to slow global warming and appeal to the region’s many independent voters who view the environment as an election issue of critical concern. Mr. Bush, who questioned the scientific basis for global warming in his first term, is deeply unpopular, and Mr. McCain, whom the president endorsed at the White House in March, has been sprinting away from him this week.

The senator has proposed mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions in the United States — Mr. Bush is opposed — but Mr. McCain’s Democratic competitors, Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, have offered plans to reduce emissions more quickly.

Asked at his news conference why voters who are concerned about the environment should support him over Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton, Mr. McCain said that his proposal was “doable” and that his rivals “have never to my knowledge been involved in legislation nor hearings nor engagement in this issue.”

He did not mention that in 2007, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama were co-sponsors of an emissions-curbing bill that he introduced with Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut. In addition, Mrs. Clinton went with Mr. McCain and other senators on a 2004 trip to Svalbard, a Norwegian archipelago, to see the effects of global warming. Mr. McCain mentioned that journey in a speech Monday on climate change, but he did not mention that Mrs. Clinton was one of those who went along.

EDIT

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/14/us/politics/14mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Thanks for the chuckle.

:puke:

this came as news to me. does anybody have any idea what they are talking about, since I gathered that his little speech the other day was pretty much the first time he has acknowledged the environment.

EDIT

McCain Opposes Renewable Electricity. A renewable electricity standard would require utilities to generate a certain portion of their electricity from wind, solar, geothermal, and other renewable energy sources. Twenty six states, including Arizona, have such requirements. In 2002 and 2005, there were votes in the Senate to require utilities nationwide to generate 10 percent or 20 percent of their electricity from renewable energy resources. Sen. McCain voted against renewable electricity every time.

2005: Voted against a renewable portfolio standard

2002: Voted against 20 percent requirement:

2002 (Vote 55): Voted to gut 10 percent requirement:

2002 (Vote 59): voted to gut 10 percent requirement:

McCain Voted Against Important Efficiency Standards. In 2002, Sen. McCain voted against an amendment by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) that would have restored a standard to require a 30 percent increase in efficiency for air conditioners. It would have saved consumers $1 billion on their electric bills, reduced energy use enough to avoid construction of 45 new power plants, and reduced greenhouse gases by 2.5 million metric tons. President Bush had blocked this rule, and Sen. McCain's vote supported him. <4/25/02>

McCain Has No Plan To Increase Energy Efficiency. Though a recent study by McKinsey &Co. found that the best way to make deep cuts in carbon emissions is to improve energy efficiency of buildings, appliances, and other energy consumers, McCain's understanding of the problem is woefully lacking. He has proposed a program of "energy audits," a system Dr. Joseph Romm calls "a weak, uncoordinated, narrowly-targeted action. They will barely have any impact when it comes to large commercial users who can already afford them."

A Weak Record on Fighting Global Warming
McCain's Conservative Judges Will Roll Back Necessary Climate Change Legislation. McCain has repeatedly promised to appoint "strict constructionistÖ Öof the character and quality of Justices Roberts and Alito." Yet as Dr. Joseph Romm, former Deputy Assistant Secretary at the U.S. Department of Energy warned, "the conservative justices almost thwarted the majority in the landmark Massachusetts v. EPA case, in which the court decided 5-4 that the EPA has the authority and responsibility to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant."

McCain Won't Support Global Warming Solutions Without Huge Role for Nukes. Sen. McCain was recently asked about the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, which would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 18 percent by 2020, and 62 percent by 2050. This level of reductions is within the range recommended by scientists to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. He said that "I will support if we have a dramatically increased role for nuclear powerÖNuclear power has got to be a very big part of any effective action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

McCain-Lieberman Emissions Cuts Are Weak. McCain's Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act, S. 280, would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 13 percent by 2020, and by 50 percent by 2050. This level of emissions reductions was deemed valuable when the bill was first introduced in 2003, but new scientific urgency since then has overtaken it. Its lower level of reductions would probably fail to stave off the worst impacts of global warming. The reductions are less than the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, S. 2191.

McCain Boasts of Global Warming Record, But Solutions Are Absent From His Website. The "environment" page of the "issues" category of his website acknowledges the importance of limiting carbon emissions, but gives no specific policy that he would advocate to do so.

McCain's Climate Message Is "Bush-Lite" And "Insubstantial." Michael Shank, of the Foreign Policy in Focus think tank, said that McCain's climate message is "not only Bush-lite, but also insubstantial." Shank pointed out that "their approaches are strikingly similar and sadly unassertive: let innovation, technology, and the free market solve the problem. According to both, business will lead and the greening of America will follow." Shank pointed out, "The only main difference between the two is that Bush would rely on ethanol subsidies to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil while for McCain leans heavily toward nuclear energy."

EDIT/END

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3279426&mesg_id=3279426

keeping this little list handy (should send it to the NYT as well)