Dodging the climate change question
This year has had some of the hottest temperatures recorded, and, if they continue to rise, our entire planet will be put in jeopardy. The next president will be dealing with melting ice caps, rising oceans, hurricanes, storms, rising temperatures, and loss of land. This is the reality of climate change. Why is it that there has been a substantial lack of feedback from both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in regards to climate change?
Climate change is an important issue for many Americans. It needs to be addressed on a national level, specifically during this election. The Paris Climate Agreement, which was recently ratified and signed by 195 heads of countries, including President Obama, aims to avoid dangerous climate change by limiting the rise of our planet’s temperature to well below 2°C. This, however isn’t enough. Climate change has been swept aside and barely mentioned in the three presidential debates, leaving many wondering: what are the candidates’ plans, and why aren’t they addressing climate change?
In the 2008 election, climate change was a topic brought up throughout the debates. In the 2016 presidential debates, however, climate change has never really been directly addressed. It was mentioned in the first debate very briefly, when Hillary Clinton brought up Donald Trump calling climate change a hoax, which he denied, and in the second, where energy was discussed — but not really climate change. It was discussed for a mere 325 seconds, and it isn’t what people want to hear. They want to hear about actual policies and plans to combat climate change.
In a recent audio poll at Mamaroneck High School, many student and faculty members shared what they thought the candidates should be discussing on this topic. Among them was Shira Julie, a junior, who thinks that climate change is very important; she wants the candidates to “discuss how important the environment is and actually to make a change.” Mr. Stader, a faculty member, had more specific topics he wanted to see discussed such as “pollution, how they’re going to fix things and where they think we’re actually going with climate change.”
Though she hasn’t spoken about her plan during the debates, it’s fairly easy to find Hillary Clinton’s stance on climate change on her website; one needs only to click on the “issues” tab to find a whole page on climate change under the heading “environment.” Her plan is fairly ambitious, including goals to generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America by the end of her first term, to cut energy waste by a third, and to reduce American oil consumption by a third. But people like Kat Andrews, a junior at Mamaroneck High School, are still looking for “an actual plan to deal with climate change if she’s in office.” This is because, despite her detailed plan online, Clinton’s views on climate change are not expressed in the news media, which leads to people such as Kat Andrews to wonder what she is actually going to do about climate change.
Trump’s website, however makes his stance on climate change quite difficult to find. There is no page on climate change or the environment — instead, any related plans are found under “energy,” and climate change is not directly addressed. He only lists a few positions relating to the environment, such as wanting to protect clean air and water, while encouraging the use of natural gas and other energy sources that will reduce emissions. The majority of his plan is making America energy independent and reducing costs. Lauren Kroell, a junior, wanted to know what exactly he was going to do, as she finds that “Trump often evades the questions he is asked and often doesn’t really give a proper explanation.” It is important for Trump to show his stance on climate change and what he would do to fix it, but instead he continuously changes the subject. This election is one in which climate change and the environment should have been an important topic, but one that has fallen to the side as the candidates have attacked each other throughout the election.
This lack of information on his website makes sense, as it’s not completely clear whether he himself actually believes in climate change. He tweeted that “the concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” He has tweeted about global warming other times, calling it a hoax. Ian Melamed, a student at Mamaroneck High School said, “I would like [Trump] to acknowledge that facts are facts — climate change has been proven to be a real thing time and time again, and it’s laughable that some people still don’t believe it.” During the first debate, when Secretary Clinton brought up Trump calling climate change a hoax, he responded by saying: “I did not — I do not say that.”
Although many people agree that climate change is an important issue, there are many reasons as to why it hasn’t been brought up throughout this election. One suggestion is simply ignorance — not enough people actually know what climate change is or may not even believe it exists. In a recent audio poll of the people of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, Steve, age 50, a resident of Bethlehem, commented on this. “I don’t know if the average person understands it, you know they don’t really understand the science behind it. You know, people say ‘Oh, I’ve been in Colorado there’s still snow there’, and it means[…], it means much more than that. […] Once people start having their lives changed because of global warming, then I think it’ll be taken more seriously.”
Another possibility is that it just isn’t important to people; many are preoccupied with what they deem to be more pressing matters, ones that are more apparent in their everyday lives. Colleen Marshall, another resident of Bethlehem, PA, observes, “I think right now many Americans who are hurting, whether it’s economically or socially, it might not be at the forefront of their mind. They have things like a roof over their head, a mortgage payment, health care, you know their children’s education that are immediately their concerns.” Among all those issues, the long term effects of climate change become lost.
“It’s human nature to prioritize immediate problems over future problems. Politicians often frame climate change as a future problem, and of course it rates lower on your priorities if you think it’s something that doesn’t need to immediately be addressed.” — Rebecca Leber, an editor at Grist
Now that the third debate has been held and the election is coming to a close without further mention of climate change, the issue continues to hang in the air, unanswered. Despite many young people eager to hear concrete plans on subjects like sustainable energy, nuclear power, carbon emissions, and pollution, these subjects have not been able to spur discussion with the candidates. The topic of climate change has been mostly overlooked in this election, and if this trend continues there can be detrimental effects, not only on the people of this generation but of generations to follow.
