Friday, May 18, 2007

Suddenly on my radar...

I'd been planning to support Obama, but his stance on global warming has been absolutely underwhelming. Then John Edwards seemed like the guy. But check out Bill Richardson's kick-ass energy plan:

* Cut oil demand: 50% by 2020
We must reduce oil imports from around 65% to 10%. We can reach these goals in part by getting the 100 mile per gallon (mpg) car into the marketplace, pushing fuel economy standards to 50 mpg by 2020, and setting a life-cycle low-carbon fuel standard that reduces the carbon impact of our liquid fuels by 30% by 2020, including increasing use of alternative fuels.
* Change to renewable sources for electricity: 50% by 2040
I am calling for a national renewable electricity source portfolio standard of 30% by 2020 – which will rise to 50% by 2040. This is aggressive, but necessary as we start using more electricity for automobiles. I will push for an energy productivity law requiring a 20% improvement in energy productivity by 2020. We could easily save customers $21 billion a year by 2020. Also, my market-based cap and trade program for greenhouse gas emissions will create incentives for the electric and industrial sectors to make significant reductions in their carbon emissions.
* Dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions: 90% by 2050
20% by 2020, and 80% by 2040 -- ten years faster than scientists say is necessary, because we must lead the world, and we can’t afford the possibility of backsliding and inaction. We will start with a market-based cap and trade system. Economists say the world can protect itself from drastic climate change at a cost of 1-3% of our economic activity. We can afford to protect the climate. Given the risks of catastrophic climate change, we can’t afford not to.
* Lead by example and restore America as the world’s leader
We must return to the international negotiating table and support mandatory world-wide limits on global warming pollution. We will work closely with fast-growing nations and, as President, I will cooperate with the European Union, the World Bank, and other allies to help finance the incremental cost of “doing it right.” I will create a North American Energy Council with Mexico and Canada, which supply about 20% of our oil, and make sure our relations with these neighbors are firm and friendly. As we reduce our demand for foreign oil, we should work with the Persian Gulf nations, and our partners in consuming nations and the United Nations Security Council, to try to create a multilateral system for protecting the Gulf so that within ten years the U.S. presence there could be sharply and safely reduced.
* Get it all done without breaking the bank
We will raise some revenue from the sales of carbon permits, for example. Further, I will get out the “green scissors” to cut back on wrongly-placed tax subsidies. Over time, this program will yield huge productivity increases in our economy, as well as significant budget savings and revenues. We will create more than 10 times as much value in the American economy by reducing our oil imports as we spend to make this program happen.


I think I'm ready to make my first campaign donation of the year.

6 comments:

Marty said...

He doesn't dislike guns, which makes him less of a target for the NRA, but might cause problems in his party. I like his understanding of foreign affairs. Ian, by the way, dear Queen, passes along a hello to the princess.

Trekking Left said...

Not only does he not dislike guns, he's the number one choice of the NRA for any presidential candidate IN EITHER PARTY.

Now, this doesn't (semi)automatically remove him from my list, but it sure doesn't help me.

Queen Whackamole said...

Is there any major gun-control legislation (either tightening or loosening) on the horizon? Making changes to domestic gun laws seems like a super low-priority issue right now—especially relative to global warming and the war—but maybe I'm missing something...
There will always be debate (particularly following a violent act like the VA Tech shootings) but I haven't heard calls for action from either side...

Trekking Left said...

Well, there's this ==> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18494626/ ... where it states up front that "The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms."

I mean, I agree that there are more important things right now, but for me, this issue is not unimportant. And I want a president who would fight against the NRA in cases like the one above. I also think that letting the assault weapons ban lapse was a horrible mistake. And it seems pretty clear to me that Bill Richardson would be okay with these things, no?

Again, I like much of what Richardson as done, but this is a factor for me.

StarkEffects said...

Why does every statement on that page sound like another --"Oops, I know more now that I'm president and just can't do any of the technical, scientific or economics magic that I promised in the campaign."?

Queen Whackamole said...

While it could be true that these are just campaign promises like any others, and subject to compromise, they could be compromised a LOT and still be stronger than other candidates' plans...

It's worth reading Richardson's qualifications. He's not a newcomer. Among other things, he served as Secretary of Energy for three years...