environmental policy

Yufu WangDr. SchoolmanPolitics of Environmental IssuesInsight: Presidential Candidates’ Positons of Energy Regulation While people worldwide celebrate the success of the climate summit in Paris—both China and the United States committed to cut carbon emission, and together with other nations pledged to cover 69% of the global climate pollution—new energy policies are under heated debates in America. The heat of presidential campaign in the air, candidates are all in full swing to position themselves about what climate change and new energy mean to American. Martin O’Malley, democratic presidential candidate, believes in the benefits of government regulation on the environment. Being a strong supporter of EPA, he advocates zero-tolerance regulation in pipe fracking and methane leaking (The Des Monies Register, 2016). O’Malley also claims that renewable energy sources is going to become “the biggest business and job creation opportunity we’ve seen in a hundred years” (Concord Monitor, 2015).On the other side of the debate, republican candidate Rand Paul argues that EPA’s “ambitious overreach”impairs individual freedom and suffocates job creation, which, as he claims, costs more than 5 percent of the US annual gross domestic product(The Washington Times, 2011). Increasing exploration of domestic oil, gas and mining, according to Paul, will improve nation energy security (Rand Paul Web, 2015). The distinctive perspectives of these two candidatesseem both supported by solid data and evidences, but a closer peek reveals the underlying values and political motivations. Just as Andrew Dessler and Edward Parson argue in The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change, “political actors are rewarded for succeeding in various ways where one’s gain is another’s loss, such as gaining andholding power, enacting policies consistent with their political principles, and delivering the benefits of governm ent action to their supporters and constituents” (Dessler & Parson, 2010). To win the hardest job interview in the world, candidates camouflage their incentives with seemly concrete supports, which introduces even more difficulties for voters to understand the game of throne. Today we are going to dig into O’Malley’s and Paul’s statement s about government regulation on energy, and take on the aspect of their values, associatedinterest groups and future votersto revel why they adopt their political positions.Political positions and one’s career path are very often closely connected, so a sense of the candidates’ political background would be rather beneficial to understand their positons. Martin O’Malley served as the governor of Maryland from Jan. 2007 to Jan. 2015. In recent ranking, Crowdpac ranked O’Malley as 6.7L on a scale of 10L to 10C, making him the second most liberal presidential candidate (Crowdpac, 2015). Rand Paul is a Republican member of the Senate from Kentucky. Crowdpac ranked Paul as a 10+C, making him the most conservative candidate (Crowdpac, 2015).C andidates’ positions on energy regulation reflex their values on the economy and the environment, inheritedfrom the values of their strongest supporters. Values are views about what is right or wrong. Judith Layzer believes that the cores of many political debates lay on the difference in values. She argues in The Environmental Case, “Nearly all environmental policy disputes are, at heart, contests over values”, and these values are usua lly masked “in terms of science, economic and risk”(Judith Layzer, 2011). The urgency of economic growth and the importance of environmental health are two main conflicting values in today’s environmental debates.On one side of the debate, MartinO’Malley advocates a stronger regulation on natural gas and fracking, and promises to adopt zero-tolerance policy for methane leaking (The Des Monies Register, 2016).O’Malley’s service as Maryland governor tells us the insight of his position. Having 3,100 mile of tidal shore, Maryland is one of the states most vulnerable to the effect of sea level rise, the consequence of global climate change. Experts estimate Maryland costal sea level to rise 1-2 feet by mid-century and 2-6 feet by 2100. Facing the rising tide, Maryland city planners, experts and social groups have been calling for preparation for this thread (The Washington Post, 2013). University of Maryland has been taking multiple measures to reduce carbon footage in campus (University of Maryland, 2009). Maryland Senate recently passed a bill, with 38 to 8 votes, to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 2006 levels by 2030 (The Washington Post, 2016). Such participations and movementsrepresent Maryland’s dedication to combat climate change. O’Malley is in the same front. During his 8-year career in Maryland, O’Malley initiated seve ral environmental organizations and engaged himself in the movement. Running presidential campaign, he carries on these environmental values and apply them to broader, national and global issues.Rand Paul, on the other hand, accuses EPA of over regulations, which as he claims cost 5 percent of USGDP and increase unemployment by 33 percent (The Washington Times, 2011). As a Senator from Kentucky, Paul’s position is closely connected to Kentucky residents’values. Kentucky is the nation’s most productive coalfield, but employment in the coal industry has been in a 30-year decline (Herald Leader, 2015). Even though this decline is due to many factors including cheap natural gas, Kentucky politician, industry executives and residents, especially in EasternKentucky, blamed environmental safety regulation and emission limits (Herald Leader, 2015). Rand Paul represent Kentucky’s best benefits in the Senate, and onpresidential campaign his positions are hand in hand with the values of the coal-mining communities. The policy he advocates would give Kentucky coal industry a boost.Besides, Paul’s hatred of government regulation and favor of economic freedom can be from his father Ron Paul’s influence. Ron Paul is a former politician, and a critic of federal government’s regulation and participation in the free market. He is the first chairman of CSE, an organization that fight for less government and less regulation. As a free-market environmentalist, Ron Paul promote what John Locke considers as the fundamental function of the government—protecting property right(The Atlantic, 2012). The father and the son have similar stand ground about environmental regulations. Ron Paul’s ideology and its influence partially explain why Rand Paul become an anti-regulation advocate.Presidential candidates’ positions can also be interpreted as attempt to gain support from interest groups. Interest groups are non-government organizations that work to influence policy; interest groups express the values of their members (World Bank, 2013). Winning support from different interest groups will give candidates invaluable resources for their campaign, including potential voters, cultural impact, people power, and money. O’Malley’s and Paul’s ties to interest groups provide another explanation for their position on energy regulation. During his career in Maryland and presidential campaign, Martin O’Malley has been a perseverant advocate for reducing carbon emission and adopting clean energy (, 2014). He also signed Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to regulate Maryland’s carbon emission. Such effortsare highly appreciated by Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN), a grassroots organization that promotes clean energy and has over 80,000 supporters from the east coast. In 2009, CCAN named O’Malley the recipient of the “Climate Leadership Award” for his contribution in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act (, 2009). During campaign season, the director of CCAN Mike Tidwell recognized O’Malley the most committed governor for climate change policy (grist, 2015).Considering CCAN has many allies, such as the S ierra Club, their backing will help O’Malley to gain wider support among pro-environment voters. The tie to CCAN will also give him advantages against other democratic candidates like Bernie Sanders, who also call for clean energy but not as strong. Simil ar to O’Malley, Rand Paul’s champion for less regulation and “allowing businesses and ideas to compete on the free market” can be interpreted as an effort to earn support from interest groups that advocate less taxing and more economic freedom, such as the Club for Growth. As a conservative non-profit organization, the Club for Growth gives support and donation through the Club for Growth PAC to several republican candidates who stand for economic freedom, including Rand Paul (The Hill, 2015).So for Paul, to combat energy regulation and send a strong message about a free market is to win himself resources from the Club for Growth and the likes.Furthermore, candidates use their positions on energy regulation to assemble future voters for a broader coalition. Politician try to gather support from diverse groups not just by putting on a charming smile, but by carefully position themselves to promise benefits.O’Malley’s and Paul’s the statements that highlight the advantages of their proposed environmental policy can be interpreted as an effort to attract more voters. In a r ecent interview, O’Malley stated that renewable energy creates job opportunities and“re presents the biggest business and job creation opportunity we’ve seen in a hundred years” (Concord Monitor, 2015). By emphasizing the economic potential of clean energy, O’Malley promised new jobs and the training programs to blue-collar workers and the long-term unemployed. Such a move would gather him wider support from the working-class. Contrary to O’Malley, Rand Paul attack ed energy regulation by stating that it causes energy bill “on the rise”. Paul argued that anti-regulation policies will give us the “most affordable and abundant forms of energy”(Rand Paul, 2015). Affordability has been a popular topic among consumers, and Paul’s argument will be rather persuasive for those who are most concerned about their energy bill. A 2013 survey shows that more than 8 out of 10 people in the US were concerned about energy prices (The Guardian, 2013).By promising a lower energy price through less regulation, Paul suddenly became an ally with these people.The debate of climate change and energy regulation have been going on, and it will certainly not stop in the presidential campaign. To truly understand why candidates adapt their positions regarding the issue, it is important to look at their statements carefully and critically. Very often, these statements rev eal candidates’ values, their support groups, and the voters they try to assemble.Reference1.The Des Moines Register. (January 24, 2016). "O'Malley supports fracking, butwith tough regulations"2.Concord Monitor. (December 8 2015). "My Turn: A clean-energy future is withinour reach"3.The Washington Times. (August 31, 2011). "PAUL: EPA regulations violateconstitutional rights"4.Rand Paul, United States Senator for Kentucky. (May 25, 2015). "AdvancingEnergy Security"5. A. E. Dessler, E. Parson. (2010). The Science and Politics of Global ClimateChange.6.Crowdpac. (July 27, 2015). "2016 Presidential Election"7.Judith Layzer. (2011). The Environmental Case8.The Washington Post. (2013). Vulnerable Maryland weighs threat of sea-levelrise9.University of Maryland. (2009). 10.The Washington Post. (2016). Maryland sets bolder target for cutting greenhousegas emissions11.Herald Leader. (2015). "Year in Kentucky business saw Toyota expand, bourbonboom, coal decline"12.Herald Leader. (2015).Kentucky coal jobs continue their record-breaking decline13.The Atlantic. (2012). "The Tea Party's Brain"., “O'Malley Applauds EPA Carbon Emission Cuts, Say s MarylandAhead of Curve," June 3, 201415.Chesapeake Climate Action Network. (2009). GOV. O’MALLEY RECEIVES“CLIMATE LEADERSHIP AWARD” FROM CCAN16.Grist. (May 31, 2015). Martin O’Malley could try to out-green Bernie Sanders17.The Hill. (August 11, 2015). "Club for Growth to direct money to five GOPpresidential contenders"18.The Guardian. (Nov. 16, 2013) Energy bills rise by 37% in three years。