Originally published on the CGS blog on May 16, 2014.
Climate change is one of the most divisive issues in Congress today. Nearly any vote related to climate change, energy policy, or conservation is split along party lines, which is well documented by Global Solutions’ 2014 Congressional Report Card. Mitch McConnell’s floor statement on May 6th is representative of this partisanship. He belittles the entire issue by stating the President will “talk about the weather at the White House” and “lecture everybody…about low-flow toilets.”
This is the kind of talk that needs to stop. Senator McConnell is not an un-educated man. He cannot seriously equate climate change to everyday weather. He does this purposefully as a political move that panders to the extreme right: the Tea Party.
McConnell also boils down the proposed policy changes to a single punitive tax on energy. However, it’s not that simple, and he knows it. In recent years many Representatives and Senators have proposed laws that would help combat climate change without new taxes. Ending big oil tax breaks, funding renewable energy, and yes, taxing carbon pollution would all have significant impacts on reducing the speed of increasing global temperatures, but these are not the only options.
What makes the debate over climate change different now than in years past is that the effects are already happening – something the newest National Climate Assessment makes crystal clear. The report also explains just how dangerous the climate threat is to all sectors and livelihoods. The effects on agriculture have broad implications that could be felt by everyone, including McConnell.
The success and sustainability of agriculture is a national security concern for every nation. If crop yields are decreased by extreme weather, then food security for the nation’s entire population is reduced. Food prices could become much more of a burden for the average citizen.
With every passing day it becomes more important that addressing climate change finds bipartisan support. Republican leaders need to be convinced of the peril of this threat. That’s why there needs to be more focus on the economic symptoms of climate change.
Senator Marko Rubio said, “I do not believe that the laws that they propose we pass will do anything about [climate change], except it will destroy our economy.” However, allowing climate change to go unchecked will certainly destroy the economy.
The report does have several examples of climate and extreme weather events directly correlating to economic hardship. Yet, the report never talks about the economic effects specifically.
In the interest of building bipartisan support, climate change needs to be exampled as a threat to Republican interests as well. Thorough cost-benefit analyses of climate change effects should be brought to the forefront of Congress’ attention. Climate change advocates need to start speaking the language of the opposition if there is to be hope for making the needed policy changes.
