Ryan:
First things first, climate change is real, and we need to stop denying it for political gain. The leading Republican presidential candidates (Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and Ted Cruz) deny the idea of climate change. 97% of climate scientists from all over the world agree human activity is expediting the effects of climate change. We also need to stop the claim that scientists are getting paid to say climate change exists, because let’s be honest, the coal and oil industries could pay them a lot more to say the opposite.
Democratic leaders such as President Obama have taken great measures to help fight climate change. President Obama has invested billions of dollars to diversify our nation’s energy infrastructure while simultaneously reducing carbon emissions. He has acted in ensuring the auto industries produce more fuel efficient cars that will average 55 mpg by 2020 which will cut reliance on oil. There is evidence all over Iowa of his wind investments, including 6,000 new jobs. Even better, the companies which have received these investments are ahead of their targets and have already paid back their loans.
We as a country cannot afford to elect leaders who deny climate change science. We see the effects of climate change in droughts, snow storms, and earthquakes which directly impact our nation’s people and our nation’s economy. Even the Pentagon has stated climate change is a major threat to national security. For example, a hotter climate causes global droughts which can cause instability and increase violence, particularly in areas such as the Middle East. As a result, the United States spends billions of dollars on defense spending to stabilize the region. Couldn’t we get ahead of the game and invest to combat the instability before it even occurs?
Republicans claim climate-based regulations kill jobs and hurt the economy, however, that may not actually be the case. California has passed countless regulations to combat climate change, and yet the average energy cost for individuals in the state has decreased. According to Vox, “Between 1990 and 2012 California cut per capita carbon emissions by 25% even as its GDP increased by 37%.” Last year, California created almost 500,000 new jobs and saw the 5th highest GDP growth in the nation. Clearly climate-based regulations do not hurt the economy.
Finally, it is important to note that President Obama reached an historic agreement with China to cut greenhouse gases below 2005 levels by 2025. China has now increased their restrictions on coal and has invested $90 billion per year on clean energy. So clearly we aren’t doing this alone as some claim.
Investing in climate change can be very beneficial for the economy. While some restrictions may hurt the oil and coal industries, we see the opposite effects on the wind and solar energy industries. Where we lose a job in coal, we gain a job in clean renewable energy. For every job we gain in clean energy, we are leaving the world a better, cleaner, and healthier place for our children.
Haley:
For the most part, I don’t disagree with Ryan on the importance of investing in renewable energy. It has obviously done great things for my home state and I don’t see anything wrong with reducing our reliance on foreign energy sources and potentially driving down energy costs. Key differences between Ryan and I on this topic are as follows: I don’t support the government over-regulating businesses or industries and climate change is not in my top 5 list of priority issues.
A seemingly continuous thorn in the side of Republicans, including myself, is the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA continually enacts rules and policies which negatively affect the job market and our nation’s industry. When it comes to climate-based EPA regulations, one particular analysis “found that by the end of 2023, nearly 600,000 jobs will be lost, a family of four’s income will drop by $1,200 per year, and aggregate gross domestic product decreases by $2.23 trillion over the entire period of the analysis.”
I find it incredibly difficult to support any regulation which harms middle-class Americans. This is not to say that jobs cannot be created by shifting our energy infrastructure away from coal and oil, however, I still find it hard to justify putting Americans out of work and expecting them to find other jobs they do not have the education or experience for. EPA regulations are crippling American families which for me outweighs the immediate effects of climate change.
One key difference between Republicans and Democrats on this issue is simply how much they care about it. I bet if you ask Ryan what his top three most important issues are he’ll say civil rights, health care, and climate change. I imagine you would find something similar with most Democrats you talk to. On my end, climate change isn’t even close to one of my top priorities. Not to speak for the party, but I don’t know of any Republican who says climate change is their deal-breaking issue. I support energy policies for economic benefits first with all other benefits as an added bonus. I could give or take the issue of climate change as long as we’re not hurting the American people.
Behind the scenes of our post…
This was an issue where we mostly had the same solutions, but we view the issue itself differently. Ryan views climate change as a top priority and I do not. As Iowans we both have a unique perspective on clean energy (we both support the Renewable Fuel Standard and the expansion of wind energy) which most likely plays a role in our compromises. All in all, very few heated debates for us this week. We’ll see how long that lasts… see you next week!
