Honey, I shrunk the GOP, Part 2: Opposing clean energy hurts GOP — Mellman

Posted on

"Honey, I shrunk the GOP, Part 2: Opposing clean energy hurts GOP — Mellman"

http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/shrunkthegop1.jpg

Part 1 examined how conservatives vow to purge all members who support clean energy or science-based policy. This is how the GOP shrinks itself.

Here, I’ll look at how, by abandoning clean energy, the GOP is taking the side of the Luddites and leaving this hugely popular issue entirely to the Democrats.  As Mark Mellman, a leading pollster for progressives since 1982, explains in a must-read op-ed in The Hill, “In attacking the clean-energy legislation just passed by the House, Republicans make three critical errors for which they may well pay a political price.”

Mellman is a shrewd analyst — see Mellman on climate messaging: “A strong public consensus has emerged on the reality and severity of global warming, as well as on the need for federal action” “” ecoAmerica “could hardly be more wrong.”  His new piece is worth reading in its entirety:

First, they confirm the potent role of the Flat Earth Society in their party. For years, many GOPers have embraced a contemporary version of the know-nothing philosophy, thereby alienating the party’s former base among better-educated, upper-income voters. In a country where 78 percent believe global warming is either happening now or foresee it in the future and where 69 percent believe global warming already constitutes a serious threat, allying themselves with the deniers only cements Republicans’ “know-nothing” image.

Because voters feel global warming poses a clear and present danger, they are demanding action. Our polling for the Pew Environment Group found a 77 percent supermajority wants the U.S. to reduce its carbon emissions. What’s more, support for action is intense, as 58 percent not only favor action, but do so “strongly.” Republicans stand with the mere 15 percent who oppose action. In this respect, GOP leaders betray their own partisans, 62 percent of whom want action to reduce carbon emissions.

Second, by opposing clean-energy legislation, Republicans reveal themselves to be anti-jobs. The economy and jobs are voters’ greatest concern and our surveys reveal that Americans believe efforts to curb global warming will be an engine driving job growth. A majority believes “efforts to reduce global warming will create new American jobs,” while just 21 percent side with Republican leaders who claim these efforts will cost jobs. Here again, in refusing to recognize the job-creating potential of a move to clean energy, Republicans are a party without a base “” there is no segment of the population where a majority agrees with them.

Indeed, voters believe these efforts will create not only new jobs, but whole new industries “” the kind of new enterprises we need as our old industries appear to fade. Refusing to recognize the job-creating potential that unfolds from technological innovation is a grievous sin, especially in this economy.

Finally, in railing against making polluters pay, Republicans reinforce their image as defenders of corporate greed at the expense of the national interest. Some energy prices may increase slightly in response to this legislation, and while GOPers want to call that a tax, voters reject that label “” instead calling it corporate greed by a nearly 20-point margin.

In fact, when the tax argument made by Republicans on the floor last week is matched against a counterpoint making it clear that it is polluters, not taxpayers, who pay and that consumers will receive part of the money polluters pay as an energy tax credit, voters side with proponents of the legislation by a 42-point margin. In an environment where voters are 12 to 20 points more likely to trust Democrats than Republicans on taxes, the GOP is unlikely to get very far with baseless accusations.

You can see the ads now “” Republicans repeating tired and discredited claims about Democratic energy taxes that no one will see, while Democrats argue that Republicans are trying to thwart efforts to create clean-energy jobs, increasing our dependence on foreign oil, refusing to make polluters pay and opposing an energy tax credit for American families. There is little doubt in my mind “” or in the data “” which side will get the better of that debate.

Voters want clean-energy legislation because they believe it will create jobs, reduce our dependence on oil and reduce the carbon pollution that causes global warming. By positioning themselves as consistent opponents of the majority’s will, Republicans risk deepening their isolation from America’s mainstream.

Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has worked for Democratic candidates and causes since 1982. Current clients include the majority leaders of both the House and Senate.

Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne makes a similar point in his op-ed explaining the “yes” vote of  Colorado’s Betsy Markey:

But another factor is changing the political calculus: the rise of a substantial alternative-energy business that encompasses wind and solar. For the first time, the political meaning of the word “energy” is not confined to oil and gas, even if old energy is still far more connected politically.

Among the employers in Markey’s district are Vestas, a leading supplier of wind power, and Abound Solar, a spinoff of research at Colorado State University that manufactures photovoltaic panels.

Markey adds that a large swath of her district is one of the most promising parts of the country for producing wind energy, and “this bill really helps our eastern plains.”

Underscoring the dawn of a new energy politics were the eight Republican votes cast in favor of the bill, notably those of Mark Kirk of Illinois and Mike Castle of Delaware. Both are considering campaigns for the U.S. Senate next year, and they may see a future that others in their party don’t.

The GOP thinks that destroying a livable climate and ceding leadership on clean energy to China, Japan, and Europe is a winning issue for them.  I think that’s science fiction.

Related Post:

« »

4 Responses to Honey, I shrunk the GOP, Part 2: Opposing clean energy hurts GOP — Mellman

  1. Susan says:

    Thanks so much for pointing out that the American public gets what denialist promoters have failed to grasp, that reality has seized control.

  2. The GOP may just be sacrificial shills for the carbon fuel industry which is desperately seeking to destroy clean energy and continue their toxic energy monopoly.

    As we move further into a more destabilizing climate, people will note the well-recorded history of deliberate suppression of science, the purposeful lie, the strategic ignorance and obstruction. From both the GOP and the carbon fuel industry.

  3. russ says:

    Politicians don’t normally try to get the attention of well informed, educated voters (except at election time), too much work. Better to go after the unwashed masses who are more easily convinced, duped or however.

    Many of the voters in both parties have little choice but to stay with a particular party due to other ideological reasons.

    Having said that, the Republicans seem to really be going over the top on the climate change point.

    Reading the blogs about the latest development (Carlin & Davidson’s paper) one is reminded that there aren’t all that many out there who can look at climate change objectively. Most have their parrot points which they keep spouting.

    Cool calm and collected action would get us down the road to real change a lot quicker than the screaming, hissy fit and often stupid replies.

    Making the necessary changes to try to correct the mess is far more important than making points with compatriots on a given blog.

  4. Rick Covert says:

    Joe,

    That was a very interesting and thorough evaluation. If I make it to my 30th class reunion in New Jersey this year I will be meeting with my uncle, who is a Republican, and bring up these points you’ve made. I’m sure he will ask me about the energy bill so it should be a very interesting conersation. It’s interesting that my cousins who work in investments, themselves conservative, are bullish on wind turbines.