The 5 Best Presidential Candidates to Address Climate Change
With all respect (and perhaps some thanks) to Mr. Gore, taking action on climate change is now a major political issue as well as a moral issue. This is particularly true for U.S. voters this year, who are trying to decide on their nation’s next president.
The successful presidential candidate will be responsible for leading his/her nation in reducing its carbon emissions, increasing its fuel efficiency standards, and developing its nascent clean energy industry. The president will also be charged with responding to parts of the country hit hard by climate change conditions, like droughts, fires, and storms.
Fortunately, voters won’t have to make their decision in the dark. The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), a non-partisan organization that describes itself as "the independent political voice for the environment," has compiled a reference chart to show voters where candidates stand on climate change.
The following are the top five presidential candidates of 2008, based on the issue of climate change. In order to assess how serious candidates truly are about the issue of global warming, they are organized below according to how well they scored out of 100 on an overall evaluation of their environmental policies, starting with the highest scorer. (And no, Steven Colbert didn’t make the list, no matter how much natural gas he provides.)
Barack Obama (96) supports:
- 80% reductions of CO2 production by 2050.
- 50 mpg fleet-wide automotive standard by 2025.
- 25% renewable electrical energy standard by 2025.
- 50% reduction in energy intensity by 2030.
- Investing in liquid coal if it reduces carbon pollution by 10%; will consider standards that ban new conventional coal plants.
Dennis Kucinich (92) supports:
- 80% reductions of CO2 production by 2050.
- 40 mpg automotive standards; supported 33 mpg automotive standard in 2005.
- 20% renewable electrical energy standard by 2010.
- General energy efficiency, although he has no target specified.
- [Has no articulated position on new coal plants and liquid coal.]
Hillary Clinton (90) supports:
- 80% reductions of CO2 production by 2050.
- 35 mpg fleet-wide automotive standard by 2017.
- 20% renewable electrical energy standard by 2020.
- 10% reduction in energy consumption by 2020.
- Investing in liquid coal if it reduces carbon pollution by 20%.
Joe Biden (84) supports:
- 80% reductions of CO2 production by 2050.
- 40 mpg fleet-wide automotive standard by 2017.
- 20% renewable electrical energy standard by 2020.
- 10% reduction in energy consumption by 2020.
- Rejecting investment in liquid coal.
Bill Richardson (82) supports:
- 80% reductions of CO2 production by 2050.
- 50 mpg fleet-wide automotive standard.
- 30% renewable electrical energy standard by 2020 and 50% by 2050.
- 20% increase in energy productivity.
- A ban on new coal plants unless they capture and store emissions; he opposes liquid coal.
Readers may note that all of the preceding five leaders on environmental stewardship are members of the Democratic Party. They will be competing against one another to win their party’s nomination over the course of the primary elections, which will run from January to September of 2008. Make sure to register to vote several weeks prior to your state’s primary elections in order to vote to nominate your choice of presidential candidate.
Readers who align more closely with the Republican Party may also be interested to know which Republican presidential candidates are offering solutions to climate change. Most ‘08 Republican candidates have as strong a record of opposing environmental protection legislation and/or have no stated positions about the country’s energy goals and issues related to climate change. However, some Republican candidates are looking to support legislation that would benefit the climate. John McCain and Mike Huckabee lead their party on legislative forsight to address climate change. Even still, Mr. McCain has opposed fuel efficiency legislation and neither candidate has a stated position on coal. The only other candidate from this party to offer some hint of beneficial legislative promises on climate change is Mitt Romney, although he opposes fuel efficiency standards "as a stand alone measure," has no position on renewable energy, and supports liquid coal.
For more information on the positions of the 2008 presidential candidates on the environment, the energy industry, and climate change, see the resources listed below or visit the LCV reference chart for presidential candidates on climate change.
References and Resources:
Where the Candidates Currently Stand | League of Conservation Voters, Heatison.org
’08: On The Record | League of Conservation Voters
Presidential Candidates weigh in on Energy Policy | Solarnation
The Candidates | League of Conservation Voters, Heatison.org
Mike Garofalo’s Blog on the presidential candidates | GO
Photo Source:
White House Back | US Government
Tags: '08, 2008, Activism, Alternative Fuels, candidates, Climate Change, Conservation, election, Politics, president, presidential candidates, vote, voting, voting+record


October 30th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Thanks for this. It’s interesting that John Edwards didn’t make the cut. While his score from LCV was poor in his year in office — and probably deservedly so — he’s been the leader in the pack on climate for the Democratic candidates. He was first out of the gate on the 80% by 2050 reduction target. And his policies, especially in regard to no dirty coal, are closer to what need than what we’ve seen from any of the other leading candidates.
SolveClimate has an analysis in its policy tracker of most of the leading candidates on each of the big global warming solutions. You can access it here: http://www.solveclimate.com
Thanks again!
Stacy Feldman
October 31st, 2007 at 8:13 am
It’s a hot button issue, and no doubt that savvy politicians will exploit the public’s concern over this to ramp up pre-electoral ratings.
In similarity, the Republican side appears to be pushing heavily on Immigration and border controls. So you end up with the Democrats pushing environment sanctions vs the Republicans focusing more so on border restriction and illegal immigrants.
Interesting choice on both sides. I’m going to vote for who I always vote for - Ralph Nader. He’s the one candidate that really receives little media attention and has been campaigning for environmental sanctions before Al Gore popularized the issue.
Of course he’ll lose, but I’d rather vote for someone I think should take the office rather then vote for the lesser of two evils.
October 31st, 2007 at 11:57 am
Ron Paul will end subsidies to oil companies. That will help competing products become more viable.
Also ending the empire and all that carbon being emitted from the wars (Iraq, Afghanistan) would be a great reduction in government created carbon.
October 31st, 2007 at 7:52 pm
Thanks for the useful link and the insightful commentary, Stacy!
November 12th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
I have to beg to differ on this one. Kucinich smokes them all because his high standards have a targeted goal set for earlier years. Although one standard is slightly lower than Obama, his goal is an entire 15 years earlier and is projected to be raised after the regulation is instituted. Most of the other candidates are just making empty promises to boost their chances of winning.
None of the other candidates have more drive to environmental improvement than Kucinich.
-Supports env. in every day life: vegan and lives in a very modest sized home
-focuses on wind and solar power (the most environmentally friendly!)
-He was the “original co-sponsor in the House of Representatives of HR 1950, the Safe Climate Act of 2007.”
-has ALWAYS had clean water near the top of his list… which until recently no one has given much concern.
“As President, I will lead the way in protecting our oceans, rivers and rural environments. I will also lead in fighting for clean, affordable and accessible drinking water. I have worked hand-in-hand with the environmental movement on many battles, from thwarting a nuclear waste dump to boosting organics to demanding labels on genetically-engineered products. A clean environment, a sustainable economy, and an intact ozone layer are not luxuries, but necessities for our planet’s future.”
February 4th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
[...] pieces, featuring the safest, most watered-down language on the issues. Still, after reading Gavin Hudson’s interesting assessment of their proposed environmental policies, I decided to do [...]
August 23rd, 2008 at 9:52 am
[...] Potential McCain Running Mate Florida Governor Charlie Crist Has Green Cred Obama and Ethanol: Is it Just About Winning Votes? The 5 Best Presidential Candidates to Address Climate Change [...]