That may sound extreme – until you consider the
utter devastation Super Storm Sandy has caused in New
Jersey, New York, and in
many communities along America’s East Coast, including in my own backyard.
Storms like Sandy, hurricanes like Katrina in the Gulf Coast, the spread of
poison ivy and dengue fever in many parts of the U.S., are all part of the same
extreme weather conditions we’re experiencing nationwide – and will continue to
experience unless we make a national commitment to reduce
our use of the coal, oil, and other fossil fuels

On Tuesday, as I write here, we have a choice. We can either elect a President and legislators who support strategies that will reduce our dependence on coal, oil and other fossil fuels that, when burned, emit the carbon dioxide that is wreaking havoc on our climate. Or we can vote for candidates who refuse to acknowledge that climate change is real and requires immediate action.

In this first-ever Green Moms election carnival, many women
who regularly blog about environmental health and safety have come together to raise
awareness about why it’s so important that we all vote on Tuesday. In many states, President Barack Obama, who advocates strong policies to stop climate change, is running neck and neck with challenger Mitt Romney, who heretofore has rejected the need for national policies to stop climate disruption. Please read these important posts and share them as widely as you can.

VOTE TO STOP MORE SANDY’s

Many women in our group have been personally
impacted by Sandy’s fury.

Ronnie of Eco-Nesting titled her post, “Sandy’s Wake Leaves a Clear Choice,” as she reflected on the storm’s $10 billion to $30 billion impact on her native New York. “The east coast has a new reality…freaky Frankenstorms and Superstorms. Why? Because we have hotter than normal sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic Ocean. This means heavier rainfall and stronger winds. This means higher sea levels and increased coastal flooding. This means increased storm surges. This means the warning signs of global warming have breached the planet’s levee and they can’t be ignored any longer…a clear choice has blown through the broken windows, boardwalks, airports, subways, power lines and our presidential election.

“The energy commitments our next president makes will affect the Frankenstorms and Superstorms my children and their children will suffer. Our next president must take global warming seriously and do something about it. Politicians in climate denial are upending nothing less than our children’s future and they will not get my vote. How about yours?”

Harriet at Climate Mama has devoted her blog to raising national awareness of the way our changing climate can disrupt our world. But Sandy brought it all home to her. “This storm should serve as a “wake up call” and force each of us to “connect the dots” and consider how our individual and collective actions have been and will shape our world and that of our neighbors, country and future generations.” Harriet took this picture in her neighborhood. The tree didn’t crush her house…this time.

As for voting, Harriet wisely notes, “Climate change isn’t red, blue, white or fuchsia, and it shouldn’t be a partisan or political issue; however it has become one, particularly in the United States of America. A major party in this country has been “occupied” by climate deniers, forcing their way into and onto the party platform. This can no longer be condoned, ignored or denied. When the polls open on Tuesday, and in those areas where there is early voting, climate change and how we will confront its impacts on our economy, on job creation and on our future and our children’s future needs to be considered and should BE one of the most important deciding factors.”

VOTE TO PROTECT OUR KIDS

Don’t miss the moving reasons why Katy at Non-Toxic Kids says she’s voting. Among them: “I’m voting because I want a better world for my kids. I want them to breathe clean air, eat clean food, and live in healthy communities with strong schools.”

Lori at Groovy Green Livin’ is voting to give kids a voice, and she hopes you will, too. “There are so many issues at stake that are near and dear to my heart and I’m frightened,” she writes. “Please don’t take your right to vote for granted. Take the time on Tuesday to head to the polls and exercise your voice and your right to vote in favor of those issues that matter most.  Think of it as using your voice to speak for those who can’t-whether it’s a child or someone who is unable to catch a ride to the polls. I’m voting on Tuesday for my children and all of yours. Won’t you join me?”

VOTE TO PROTECT WOMEN

VOTE TO MAKE OUR COMMUNITIES MORE SUSTAINABLE

Susan of Practically Green stresses that it’s important to support candidates who commit to solving environmental problems, but we need to focus on individual and collective actions that will reduce climate change and make our communities healthier and greener for future generations, too. “We can always vote for people locally and nationally that understand this is really, really important. By focusing on what we can do, and moving forward one step at a time, our collective actions will add up and will make a difference.”

Paige at Spit That Out The Book says, “When voting for a candidate for national office, my top priority is generally environmental policy. I believe rising oceans are not something to joke about, and any candidate who mocks climate change or puts industry interests above safer chemicals is not going to win my favor. After all, when we are poisoning our children and destroying our planet, how can that not trump everything else?”

Leigh Ann at Green 4 U reminds us of questions we need to ask all candidates when we’re considering awarding something as precious as our vote. Among them: “Given that our climate is changing what do you propose to do if elected to help keep the greenhouse gases and other contributing factors from increasing? How do you propose to better prepare the federal government for disaster recovery for the extreme weather caused by climate change?”

VOTE TO GIVE US THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT WE’RE FACING

Though climate change has jumped front and center into the electoral debate, it is not the only important issue voters will decide this year.

Mary at In Women We Trust reminds voters how important it is to support Proposition 37, a California ballot initiative that would simply require food producers to label products that contain genetically modified organisms. Mary points out that it’s primarily giant conglomerates who oppose having to own up to how they’re producing the food we eat. “Please vote YES for the right to know what’s in your foodchain,” Mary implores.

In a second post, Mary compares two political strategies competing for voters’ attention in this election: a cynical plot to collect votes by generating false fears, versus an effort to remind people that we can still have a world of hope and change.” When she votes on Tuesday, says Mary, she’ll be voting for compassion and common sense, not hate.

Marcia Yerman at Moms Clean Air Force wants voters to know about the outsized influence companies and operatives like the infamous Koch brothers are having on this election and on America’s environmental policies. “The efforts to stymie the President in his agenda to improve our health standards throughEPA regulations have been spearheaded by monied influences–not only in the Presidential race—but down the ticket as well. Rep. Henry Waxman has stated that the 112^th Congress is “the most anti-environmental house in history.” A year ago, Waxman launched adatabase of anti-environmental votes. A June 1, 2012 report illustrated how House Republicans have voted to diminish environmental protections. There were 77 votes to attack the Clean Air Act, and 37 votes to obstruct any forward movement to tackle climate change.” Talk about hijacking democracy!

VOTE FOR CHANGE

Harriet at Climate Mama survived Sandy better than most. But seeing the destruction so close at hand has reminded her how important it is to speak out – and to vote. “While I try to refrain from bringing politics into our blog posts on ClimateMama,” she writes,  “I feel we have no choice but to discuss politics now. Mother Nature, through Sandy, says we must and we have to.

“From my vantage point, I see that the Republican party has been co-opted and taken hostage by many climate deniers who not only won’t put short and long term fixes for climate change on the agenda, but they vehemently deny the fact and reality of man made climate change. Too many in the party are demanding that we continue to invest in fossil fuels and the infrastructure that will keep us reliant and addicted to this form of energy that scientists tell us IS causing our climate to change. This is a path that is leading to “mutually assured destruction,” a concept from the cold war, video games, movies and now once again real life.

“There is too much at stake not to discuss this on the eve of what may be the most important presidential election of our time.”

Please. Vote.

The post Vote on Tuesday. Your Life Depends on It. appeared first on Big Green Purse.

Are we “greener” than we were four years ago?

Yes, we are, and Barack Obama deserves a lot of the credit.

Despite strident anti-environmental opponents on Capitol Hill, President Obama has managed to use the power of his office – deployed primarily through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of the Interior – to make our air and water cleaner, to reduce our reliance on foreign oil, to protect our public lands, and to attack the climate change that causes extreme weather events like Hurricane Sandy.

Is his job done? Not by a long shot. But are we making progress? Definitely. I’m supporting the President for a second term because I think he offers our best hope in this election to continue to make progress
in the future. 

This all became extremely clear to me earlier this week, as Hurricane Sandy was ripping away part of my roof. While I huddled in my basement listening to the terrifying wind and the torrential rain, I found myself getting mad, not just about what it would cost me to repair the damage, but about the reasons behind this catastrophic storm. Meteorologists, scientists, environmentalists, public health professionals, concerned citizens, and yes, President Obama, have all made the link between burning fossil fuels like coal and oil and extreme weather events like Sandy, let alone Hurricane Katrina and many others. And they’ve tried to throw the weight of their various offices behind solutions that would help wean us from fossil fuels.

Meanwhile, conservative forces in Congress and many state houses around the country have blocked legislation that would reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and opposed efforts to increase energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy sources like solar and wind. Bolstered by their conservative colleagues on Capitol Hill and pressured by Tea Party activists, Republican challenger Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, his running mate, have dismissed climate change, have
literally said they “love” coal, and would strive to cripple the EPA if they were elected to office.

Maybe to some people, this is just “talk.” But as someone who has worked in Washington, D.C. to promote environmental protection during the Carter years, the Reagan years, the Bush 1 years, the Clinton years, the Bush 2 years, and now the last four years of the Obama Administration, I can say, and say unequivocally, that environmental policy consistently fares worse under Republican administrations than under Democratic ones. As Sandy has shown, the planet very much faces a climate change tipping point. Obama is on one side, Romney on the other. For me, siding with Obama is a no brainer.

Has Obama accomplished nearly enough? No.

Do I wish more change had happened? Of course.

 But we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Though President Obama did not mastermind enough legislative victories, he used the power of the Executive Office to achieve many significant environmental gains. It is reasonable to assume that Romney would use his office equally to undercut them.

 I support the re-election of President Obama.

 FOR THE RECORD…
Here is a run-down of some of the major environmental achievements of the Obama Administration, compared to the positions of challenger Mitt Romney.

Cleaner Air

Under directives from President Obama, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency managed to push through the first-ever national safeguards to reduce mercury and arsenic in our air and establish carbon dioxide limits for
power plants. (Romney hopes to eliminate EPA’s power to regulate carbon dioxide and remove rules that limit
emissions from coal plants.) 

Former EPA administrator Carol Browner said the safeguards “are preventative medicine—they will annually forestall thousands of premature deaths, hospitalizations, and respiratory ailments.”

The American Lung Association’s analysis of air pollution shows that all 25 of the cities with the worst ozone pollution in the last report have improved, and 23 of the 25 worst particulate-matter cities are getting cleaner.

All in all, the President used the Clean Air Act to issue six major environmental rules, including ones that limit toxic air pollutants, greenhouse gases, soot, and smog-forming pollutants.

By pretty much any measure, America’s air is cleaner today than it was four years ago.

Energy

President Obama has issued an Executive Order on Federal Sustainability requiring Federal agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target; increase energy efficiency; reduce fleet petroleum consumption; conserve water; reduce waste; support sustainable communities; and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote environmentally responsible
products and technologies.

President Obama rejected the initial northern half of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would run from Canada to Texas, although he has deferred a final decision. Though the President proposed opening more offshore areas to oil and gas drilling, he has maintained a drilling moratorium off the Pacific and most of the Atlantic coasts. He is seeking federal safety standards for hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a process by which natural gas is extracted, and opposes $4 billion in annual tax breaks for oil and gas companies. (Romney supports the Keystone XL pipeline, supports opening all our public lands to oil and gas development, including America’s Arctic Wildlife Refuge, and supports giving more tax breaks to oil and gas companies.)

President Obama is the first president to allow public lands to be opened to solar projects. He has also  approved
17 utility-scale projects with a capacity of 5,900 megawatts, enough to power about 1.8 million homes. The Department of the Interior has continued to support renewable energy initiatives, including six on-shore wind facilities with 800 megawatts of capacity and eight geothermal plants with 424 megawatts of capacity. In total, these projects will generate enough energy to power 2.3 million homes.

The President supports extending federal tax credits for utility-scale wind projects and favors loan guarantees and grant programs for green energy companies. (Romney opposes both.)

Overall, today we get twice as much energy from wind, solar and geothermal sources than we did four years ago.

How does that compare with the Republican approach to energy? The House Republican budget is aiming to cut the Department of Energy’s Office of Science and the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, both of which have played an essential role in America’s quest to achieve energy independence. In fact, reports Juliet Eilperin in the Washington Post, cuts the Republicans recommend would trigger a 19 percent reduction in funding for clean energy – despite the irrefutable evidence that clean energy is the primary solution to climate change.

Further, reports Eilperin, last month, urged on by several business and energy groups, the GOP-controlled House passed the Stop the War on Coal Act, which would reverse several Obama regulations and proposals. It would bar the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases, jettison the stricter fuel standards and give states primary authority over the storage and disposal of coal-combustion waste. Fortunately, that bill has little chance in the Democratic-controlled Senate, and will have no chance at all if President Obama is re-elected.

Fuel Economy

The Obama Administration’s new fuel economy standards are projected to save consumers $1.7 trillion at the pump by 2025 while avoiding 6 billion metric tons of carbon pollution, an amount  equal to total U.S. carbon emissions in 2010. Obama’s standards for new vehicles, Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, was quoted
saying in the Washington Post, rank as “the biggest move to get us off our oil dependence by any president ever.” The rules, which took effect this year, will require the U.S. auto fleet to average 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025.

Vehicles are more efficient today than they were four years ago, a trend that will continue for the next 13 years…unless Romney reverses the rule.

Wilderness – The Grand Canyon and Yellowstone National  Park

At the President’s direction, the federal Bureau of Land Management announced a ban on new hard rock mineral leasing and mining (primarily for uranium) in a million acres of wild lands adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park.  The mining ban will protect important wildlife habitat and water quality that complement the park’s natural systems.

Obama has also advised all federal agencies with a role in land stewardship to consider the potentially catastrophic effects of climate change when developing their management plans. Crown jewels like Yellowstone National Park may not be suitable for many of the animals living there in the next century. Federal agencies there have been asked to maintain corridors so threatened species can migrate — and survive — as conditions change.

Family Planning

President Obama supports a woman’s right to control her own body, including the right to reproductive choice. He is a strong proponent of Planned Parenthood and other social services that provide contraception and family planning, and believes access to family planning methods should be a basic health care. (Romney opposes reproductive choice and has said repeatedly during his campaign that Planned Parenthood should be shut down.)

Given the role that population growth plays in fueling climate change and pollution, it should be a top priority for any administration to support family planning.

Supreme Court

The most long-lasting impact of any presidency is tied to the justices a President appoints to the Supreme Court. The court is routinely called upon to decide whether environmental laws are legal and can be enforced. The decision of the current, extremely conservative court to allow corporations to be considered as citizens puts them on equal footing with you and me. Yet we know we are not equal, given the billions of dollars they have to spend lobbying elected officials and, as we have seen in this election cycle, swamping voters with misleading ads. The next President will in all likelihood have the opportunity to appoint at least two justices to the court as the oldest members retire. President Obama has a solid track record of appointing justices who value the rights of citizens and who would uphold laws like Roe v. Wade, which guarantee reproductive freedom and access to safe abortion. (Romney has said repeatedly he would work to overturn Roe v. Wade; given the chance, he would appoint justices who share that view.)

PLEASE: VOTE!

An election should never really be about the person running for office. It should be about the world we want to live in, the vision we have for our future and the future of those who come after us. 

We are on the right path. But we will not get much farther along if we don’t vote in this election. We will not get much farther along if we don’t vote to re-elect President Obama.

Please. Go to the polls. 

The post I am Voting for Barack Obama Because We are Greener than We Were Four Years Ago. appeared first on Big Green Purse.