Quick quiz. Name the presidential candidate that supports these positions:
If you chose "all of the above" you were right. Take your national ID card (oops, no consensus there) and march to the voting booth. Do not pass "Go."
Listen to sound bites from the 16 major party candidates (yes, 16), and with rare exception, you will hear support for the issues you care about, which does not in any way mean those candidates really support the issues you care about in the way that you care about them.
The Daily Green will endeavor to cut through the rhetorical skin and see what policy muscle the candidates have developed. At this point in the campaign, it's hard to pick any one candidate that stands clearly ahead of the rest, but there is variation among the policies and strategies that have been discussed to tackle global warming and move the economy onto a low-carbon fuel diet. One good thing about the long, long run to the White House (there is something) is that candidates at this early stage can still adopt the best policies of their competitors -- and pressure from the voting public is a powerful force in shaping their decisions.
There's one clear distinction that's emerged in the early primary season: Democrats are being much more detailed about their energy and global warming policies than Republicans.
A comparison of Democratic candidates can make a voter dizzy with numbers. (Is a 90% reduction in C02 emissions below 2006 levels by 2050 better than an 80% reduction below 1990 levels? Is it better, or more feasible, to raise fuel economy to 40 mpg by 2017, or 50 mpg by 2020, or maybe 4% a year for 18 years? Let me get out my calculator.)
Republicans, with the possible exception of Sen. John McCain (30% below 2004 levels by 2050), seem to have a math phobia at this stage in the campaign.
Seeing Red? See How the Republicans Stack Up.
Feeling Blue? See How the Democrats Stack Up.
Enter your city or zip code to get your local temperature and air quality and find local green food and recycling resources near you.