McCain takes the lead on climate change — by not showing up for work

When John McCain is asked how he’s substantively different from George W. Bush, the senator has a programmed response he repeats without hesitation. At the top of the list: “climate change.”

Indeed, McCain, at least recently, has made his “green” credentials a key part of this early stage of his campaign. Two weeks ago, he traveled quite a bit to talk up his plan to combat global warming. “I’m proud of my record on the environment,” McCain told reporters. “As president, I will dedicate myself to addressing the issue of climate change globally.”

There are more than a few problems with McCain’s boasts. For one thing, McCain’s environmental positions shift all the time, and some of his policy opinions contradict each other. For another, McCain has a nasty habit of promoting environmental policies he’s already voted against.

Nevertheless, McCain wants voters to consider him someone who’ll work hard to address global warming if he’s in the White House. In the meantime, though, he’s not willing to work hard at all to address global warming while he’s in the Senate.

While Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has made action on climate change a central theme in his campaign, he won’t be on hand to vote next week when the Senate considers a landmark bill imposing mandatory limits on greenhouse gases.

In a press conference late Wednesday afternoon, McCain said he did not support the bill sponsored by two of his closest allies, Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) because it doesn’t offer enough aid to the nuclear industry, and he would not come to the floor to vote on it.

“I have not been there for a number of votes. The same thing happened in the campaign of 2000,” he said. “The people of Arizona understand I’m running for president.”

That’s probably true. But the people of the country also understand that he’s promising to be a “leader” on one of the nation’s most pressing issues. And I’ll give McCain a tip: leaders show up for work once in a while.

Lexi Shultz, deputy director of the climate program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said, “If you don’t come back to vote on the bill, you can’t say that you’re all that serious about taking action on climate change.”

Matt at TP noted all of the hot air (pardon the pun) McCain has offered on the issue.

Earlier this month, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) sought to distance himself from President Bush by calling for a mandatory limit on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. “I will not shirk the mantle of leadership that the United States bears,” McCain said in a speech at a wind power company.

On his campaign website, McCain (R-AZ) calls himself “a leader on the issue of global warming,” which he says is “an issue we can no longer afford to ignore”:

“John McCain has a proud record of common sense stewardship. Along with his commitment to clean air and water, and to conserving open space, he has been a leader on the issue of global warming with the courage to call the nation to action on an issue we can no longer afford to ignore.”

It all sounds very impressive, right up until you ask McCain to actually do something on the issue on which he claims to be “leading.”

And just for good measure, let’s also not forget that if McCain did show up for work, he’d vote against the Lieberman-sponsored legislation on global warming. This comes just two weeks after McCain appeared at Jersey City’s Liberty Science Center to talk about how great the bill is: “I hope that it will be passed and I hope that the entire Congress will join in supporting it and the president of the United States would sign it.”

So, McCain flip-flops on a major environmental bill, but won’t bother to show up to vote against it. Sounds like “leader,” doesn’t it?

In a press conference late Wednesday afternoon, McCain said he did not support the bill sponsored by two of his closest allies, Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) because it doesn’t offer enough aid to the nuclear industry, and he would not come to the floor to vote on it.

So, wait… he opposes the bill because it doesn’t dole out enough money? How very McCain, wanting to spend more on dangerous and unnecessary technology and less on beneficial public services.

Anyways, if he supports funding for nuclear power and carbon emissions caps, how is “no cap and continue current funding” better than “cap with increased but less than ideal funding?” Also, anyone know how much work has he done to get the aid package increased? I’m not going to go research this right now, but I’ll make an educated guess that his effort on this has been somewhere between bupkiss and diddily-squat

Somebody needs to call malarkey on this guy.

  • “And I’ll give McCain a tip: leaders show up for work once in a while.”

    Yeah, unlike Bush.

    And McCain, apparently.

  • So now he won’t support this bill because it doesn’t offer enough aid to the nuclear industry? Gee…$154 billion isn’t enough?

    WASHINGTON, DC – The leaders of six national environmental and public interest groups warned today that the impending Lieberman-Warner climate change bill could contain at least $544 billion in taxpayer subsidies for nuclear energy. This would represent the biggest federal handout in history for the nuclear industry, already the most heavily subsidized energy sector over the past 50 years.

    The Lieberman-Warner bill is expected to be on the Senate floor in early June. According to an analysis conducted by Friends of the Earth, the bill contains close to half a trillion dollars that can be accessed by the nuclear energy industry under a vaguely entitled category for “zero and low carbon energy technologies.” Nuclear is the only energy industry that could fall under this category that does not have a specific carve elsewhere; funding for renewable energy is identified separately in the bill.

    “Although the word ‘nuclear’ has been carefully omitted from the bill, it is clear that this is a covert attempt to bolster a failing nuclear power industry in the name of addressing climate change,” said Brent Blackwelder, president of Friends of the Earth. “It’s time to focus on real global warming solutions like solar, wind and energy efficiency, not to further fatten the moribund nuclear calf.”

    http://action.foe.org/ pressRelease.jsp?press_release_KEY=371

    Take a look at what the lifetime scorecard is for all three candidates: McCain: 26%, Clinton 90%, Obama 96%
    http://www.presidentialprofiles2008.org/

  • Also, anyone know how much work has he done to get the aid package increased? I’m not going to go research this right now, but I’ll make an educated guess that his effort on this has been somewhere between bupkiss and diddily-squat

    He’s at about bupkiss-minus-1,000, if such an amount of work can actually be measured.

    McCain’s the Arizona gold miner who’s “all hat and no mine (or mind, for that matter)”

  • McCain said he did not support the bill sponsored by two of his closest allies, Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) because it doesn’t offer enough aid to the nuclear industry, and he would not come to the floor to vote on it.

    Now let me see if I’ve understood this. His leadership on global warming, which is an “important” issue to McWhatsHisName, means voting against a bill that promotes good policy on global warming.

    Oh wait, I forgot, he’s for eliminating earmarks so he can balance the budget. So he’s against this bill because of earmarks?

    Oh wait, there isn’t a big enough earmark in the bill?

    Um, what am I missing here…? Basic logic? How did this guy get out of high school?

  • Cap n’ trade while giving away the carbon credits (as opposed to auctioning them) is a joke.

  • And I’ll give McCain a tip: leaders show up for work once in a while. — CB

    Doesn’t grilling BBQ ribs for the press count as work? At least as much as whacking brush?

  • This nation will return on a path to greatness when election fraud starts being defined as the lying that candidates do to the voting public in order to get elected. By that standard, McCain would be headed off to jail.

  • Your bashing McCain for being a flip-flopper. Fair enough. The only problem is that you didn’t read the article to which you referred in your article. He never said that he supported the final bill. He said that he was aware of the conversations and negotiations going on and that they were leading to a bill that he really liked and was ready to support. Furthermore, he said that he was leery of what Warner and Lieberman were doing apropos of the nuclear industry during negotiations. The resulting bill isn’t what he wanted. So it goes. That doesn’t make him a flip-flopper, however. If you can’t tell the difference or you’re too blinded by your lefty-bias, then there’s little help for you. Otherwise, I’d suggest taking a remedial reading class to help you parse other people’s writing.

    It’s also interesting to read people bashing McCain for his reliance on nuclear power. Al Gore also feels that nuclear power is a viable addition to our energy arsenal. I guess that makes Al a cold-hearted Republican after all.

  • Comments are closed.