How “Green” is the McCain VP Short List?
With the opportunity for sustained media face-time at a premium before the upcoming national party conventions, people are expecting to learn any day who the presidential candidates have chosen to be the respective choices for vice-presidential candidates. Now that energy and environmental issues have become increasingly salient, each of the candidates has to give at least some consideration to how their potential ticket-mate stands on energy-related and environmental issues. Believe it or not, this may actually ring more true for Republican John McCain than it does for Democrat Barack Obama, as the Democrats have historically been the party of environmental protection.
To help you wade through all of media hype and speculation, I’ve put together a short list of possible McCain runningmates and their positions on energy and the environment. To add some color, I’ve enlisted the support of several prominent bloggers who have more intimate knowledge of the potential candidates’ environmental stance and record (where possible).
[Please note that I do not claim to be a prognosticator. And with the list of potential GOP vice-presidential candidates longer than the list of Beltway lobbyists running the McCain campaign, who actually can? I've added a few 'long-shots' to the end of this list, but it is quite possible that McCain's selection is absent from the following collection.]The Short List:
Tim Pawlenty: Pawlenty is relatively young, conservative, and popular. As the Governor of Minnesota, Pawlenty Advanced the Community Based Energy Development Credit to encourage the development and use of locally owned wind and clean energy sources and established a goal of obtaining 800 megawatts of community based wind to be added to our electric system by 2010. Pawlenty also proposed and passed Minnesota’s largest ever Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) agreement, authorizing the set-aside of 120,000 acres of marginal crop land near environmentally sensitive waterways.
Maria Surma Manka of Maria Energia: “Governor Pawlenty has responded well to Minnesotans - including his evangelical Christian pastor - who have demanded action to fight global warming. Thanks to citizens, legislators and the Governor, Minnesota has a biofuels mandate, renewable energy standard and efficiency requirements. But we still struggle with our dependence on coal and oil. Whether chosen as VP or not, I hope “T. Paw” will show even stronger leadership to help move us away from our old-fashioned energy system and on to something cleaner and more efficient for the 21st century.”
Mitt Romney: I know I might make some enemies by saying this, but I have a hard time believing that anyone with five children in this day and age can honestly call themselves an environmentalist [Editor's note: this thread has been picked up in the GO Forums if you'd like to discuss it at depth].
As governor of Massachusetts from January 2003 to January 2007, Mitt Romney got off to a promising start on a green issues, but then repeatedly disapointed the state’s environmental community [PDF]. In 2005, Romney pulled Massachusetts out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a pact between Northeastern states that calls for emissions cuts, even though his administration had spent more than two years helping to shape the deal (since then, Romney’s successor, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick [D], reversed that decision).
Romney’s opposition to the proposed offshore wind farm in the waters of Nantucket Sound is not likely to gain him any favor in the eyes of renewable energy advocates, or the larger environmental community. Wendy Williams at The Huffington Post: “Throughout his four-year term heading up the Bay State government, Romney’s behind-the-scenes stalling tactics were both legion and legend.”
Charlie Crist: Florida Governor, Charlie Crist may have one of the most progressive environmental platforms of all McCain’s pottential VP candidates. In a January interview with Grist, Gov. Crist spoke unflinchingly about his support for the environment. He said, “[I]t really goes back to Teddy Roosevelt for me, as a Republican — here was a guy 100 years ago who understood the importance of conservation: protecting the environment, establishing our national park system.
Noah Levy of Red, Green, and Blue: “He has shown himself through words and actions to be a true friend to the environment. However, the reversal of his position toward offshore drilling combined with his shrugging off of McCain’s negative vote toward the restoration of the Everglades reek of political opportunism.”
John Thune: The young, extremely conservative senator from South Dakota, spent 3 terms in the House and then knocked off Tom Daschle in the 2004 election. Thune had the highest LCV score of all the potential VPs at 30%. But that figure is up from a 9% rating the Congressman earned in the 109th Congress (2001-2002), and from 2004, when he earned the LCV’s “Dirty Dozen” designation.
More recently, Thune has been a champion of the corn ethanol industry, and has voted to protect the economic interests of Big Ag in his home state of South Dakota. Thune is also part of the so-called “Gang of Ten,” a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators pushing a proposed energy policy that would break the stalemate currently dogging Congress. The proposal would open additional drilling areas in the Gulf of Mexico, and allows Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia to choose whether they want to drill of their coasts. Existing bans off the West Coast and ANWR would remain in place. The proposal would also dedicate $20 billion to R&D of alternative fuels and extends a series of tax credits and incentives, such as for the purchase of hybrid vehicles.
Eric Cantor: The four-term Republican Representative from Virginia’s seventh district took two full terms to break out of the basement of the LCV ratings with a score of 0%; but is now making a run for double digits as Cantor has moved to 5% in the last term and 7% in the current term.
Terry Carter of Too Progressive: “Eric Cantor has a history of blindly following the failed regressive policies of the Bush administration and the Republican party as a whole, voting nearly 100 percent of the time with the Bush administration throughout his (Cantor’s) Congressional career. That having been said it pretty much goes without saying that Cantor is once again siding with the Republican party (and the big oil companies) and promoting a regressive energy policy that will provide virtually no long OR short term relief for average American’s struggling with gas and energy prices. Cantor, a potential VP candidate, Republican presidential nominee John McCain and the Republican party as a whole are once again showing where their true allegiance lies - with the big oil companies that have upported their party for years.a prolific fundraiser for the campaign.”
Longer Shots:
Christine Todd Whitman: Though probably a long shot, the former Secretary of the EPA in the at the beginning of George W. Bush’s first administration now runs an energy lobbying group called the Whitman Strategy Group.
Newt Gingrich: Newt’s been hard at work billing himself as an environmentalist as of late. Economically-bereft “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” campaign. While Gingrich might have the conservative record to attract that particular wing of the party, he may be too polarizing of a figure to be McCain’s runningmate.
Bobby Jindal: of Louisiana. Jindal Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies in 2007 and Voted YES on deauthorizing “critical habitat” for endangered species in 2005. It’s not all bad though. Jindal did vote YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M in 2006.
Bob Portman: Virtually unknown nationally, Portman is a former one-term congressman from the key state of Ohio, who, in his single term as a U.S. Representative earned an LCV score of 36% in the 105th Congress (1998-1999). Portman likes canoeing and kayaking. In 1984 he traveled to China to kayak the Li River and a portion of the Yangzi River. He has also kayaked the entire Rio Grande.
Concluding Remarks:
John McCain has a very real dilemma to address: How does he simultaneously satisfy the conservative wing of the Republican Party and attract the moderates and independents who would be a critical component of a McCain win? More specifically, can candidate McCain select a VP runningmate with a strong record on the environment, one that might also support a cap-and-trade for carbon emissions - a rather unpopular among most conservative Republicans - and still mobilize the conservative base?
We’ll soon find out.
Related Posts:
- Is McCain Serious About Cap-and-Trade? Economic Adviser Forbes Doesn’t Think So
- Is Florida Governor Charlie Christ’s ‘Green Cred’ Deserved?
- Where Does Chuck Hagel Stand on Environmental Issues?
Sources used for this story: U.S. News and World Report; Right Wing News; CBS News; League of Conservation Voters
Photo: Ohio AFL-CIO








I am not sure I have ever heard as ignorant a comment as the one in which you state that someone cannot be considered an environmentalist, if they have 5 children. What is the magic environmentally correct number 1, or 2? You are an idiot for putting forth such a hypothesis! Don’t look now, but I think your lack of education is showing. I suppose Gore is an environmentally friendly person because he doesn’t have 5 children…even though he flies around the country in a private jet, and drives a massive gas guzzling SUV. Just goes to show how twisted the left thinking has gotten.
If you are green and have five opinionated greens, you have multiplied your greenness. Mitt would be good anywhere.
The problem with Libs at Huffpo is that first they bend the truth and then they lie.
No one with 5 kids could be an environmentalist? Well, if the earth weren’t designed for people to inhabit it, who was it designed for? Apparently, not just you and your mom. Contrary to your anti-family, anti-truth comment the fact of the matter is that having 5 children would only prove one’s faith in the environment, and contributing and giving back to this world we live in. Whereas, those who are content with singlehood and a dog might consider how much they are actually giving back. Especially recognizing the fact that they’ll have no real existing legacy after Sparky and them die in less than 100 years. Hats off to those “environmentalists”.
Saying that a person with five children can’t be enviromentalists makes you an inhuman communist not green. Bastard!!!!
Folks-
The issue here is one of resource consumption and something called the exponential function, not of Al Gore and the Huffington Post.
The exponential function, for example, shows that if we keep consuming energy at 2% growth, in the next 35 years we will consume as much more as we did in all of history up till now.
I strongly urge you familiarize yourself with the works of physicist Al Bartlett. Seriously, you don’t have to search through JSTOR or EBSCO to find the journal articles (but I could probably help you out with that). Just watch this short video with an open mind to the possibility that all growth is not good.
(Part 1 of 8 of a lecture given by Prof. Bartlett at the Univ. of Colorado. If you can, watch them all, but after the first you will get the idea)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY
Not only enemies, but your stupidity is showing! America and environmentalism, at least when properly viewed is based on good, strong, sensible families.
“America and environmentalism, at least when properly viewed is based on good, strong, sensible families.”
Yes, but environmentalism is not based on large families. Population is the biggest problem facing this planet today. People having 5 children are just ignorant.
People, pull yourselves together. Let me try to put this in simple terms.
Leaving a legacy - that’s great, though hardly essential. Contributing and giving back to the community - good stuff and one of this country’s strong points. Strong, sensible families - an essential foundational component of society. Unsustainable growth in a culture that consumes far more than any on the planet - something that must, at least, be on the table in any discussion about the very real environmental problems we are facing now and will be facing in the future.
Commenters: You’ve really gotten sidetracked here, and appear to have missed the real and valuable analysis of the environmental track record of potential Republican VP candidates provided in this post.
If you’re interested, the discussion about the size of families has also migrated into the Green Options forums where you can cast a vote and/or weigh-in on the topic.
http://discuss.greenoptions.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=642&start=0#p3872