image from Breitbart
Next week, Kansas Democrats and Republicans will rock out with their caucuses out to choose a candidate for the presidential election.
Unfortunately, little has been brought up at either side’s debates about the environment, excluding a snowman that apparently posted video questions on YouTube for one of the first Democratic debates this season.
Here is a quick look at how green each of the remaining candidates are.
image from AverageBro
Policy Pro: Clinton has spent her Senate years as a member of the Environment and Public Works committee, so she understands the need for change.
Controversial Con: She was on Wal-Mart’s board of directors from 1986-1992 and may still be bogged down by “big business.” She probably won’t find global warming solutions in Aisle 5.
image from Earthfirst
Policy Pro: Obama received endorsements from the Sierra Club and The League of Conservation Voters for his position in the Senate. He has fewer ties to polluting industries and should be able to choose better advisers.
Controversial Con: He supports the now-typical cap-and-trade program to reduce emissions by 80 percent by 2050, a lofty (and easily avoidable) goal.
image from The Washington Note
Policy Pro: First candidate to make his campaign carbon-neutral and the first to propose many touted talking points, such as the 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050.
Controversial Con: Support of ethanol as an alternative fuel source, even though its efficiency and cost-effectiveness have been called into question.
image from Greenhome
Policy Pro: Work with other countries to reduce emissions, outlaw coal as an energy source.
Controversial Con: Is anyone sure he’s still running for president? I think he just likes seeing himself on YouTube.
image from USLiberals
Policy Pro: Um, turn the lights off when you leave the room?
Controversial Con: Supports an increased reliance on coal and domestic oil. At least the haze from unregulated greenhouse gases should avert potential terrorists.
image from Gregqualls
Policy Pro: Draws in the much-needed Evangelical conservatives with the 11th Commandment: Father God created Mother Earth.
Controversial Con: What would Jesus do? I suppose He would support coal pollution and be vague about setting goals.
image from TheBrownSpectator
Policy Pro: Supports plans for energy independence and cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
Controversial Con: After claiming that people don’t want change in the White House and being tied to a global warming denier group, he’s not too interested.
image from GreenDaily
Policy Pro: Would end subsidies to the oil industry and believes that war is a contributor to pollution problems.
Controversial Con: Paul’s campaign is determined by the free market.
image from The Guardian
Policy Pro: First Republican to talk seriously on the issue and to understand the connection between global warming and national security.
Controversial Con: Ironically, the driver of the Straight Talk Express hasn’t mentioned any specific targets to combat climate change.
Candidate information from Grist.