Fox and The Wall Street Journal Don't Get It: Americans Want Action on Global Warming and Clean Energy

Originally posted at The Seminal.

Despite what the Wall Street Journal would have you believe, the election on Tuesday did not indicate opposition to action on global warming and clean energy. In fact, we are now seeing more and more evidence that the opposite is true.

A poll was just released with some extremely encouraging data on voters' opinions on global warming and clean energy. It was commissioned by The National Wildlife Federation and conducted by Zogby.

Here are some of the findings, which show that support for combating global warming and investing in the green economy have gained tremendous support, especially among a few key demographics:

78 percent of voters agree that investing in clean energy is important to revitalizing America's economy. Let that sink in for a second. If we can get 60% of the United States Senate to agree on this we'll be in good shape.

57 percent of voters said it was important to back candidates who support reducing global warming pollution.

60 percent agreed that elected officials should make combating global warming a high priority.

The results also showed increasing demand for climate action among some key demographic groups:

Independents: 57 percent felt it was important to vote for candidates who support reducing global warming pollution, up from 49 percent in 2006.

Minorities: An incredible 85 percent of African-Americans called it important to vote for climate candidates, a huge increase from 59 percent in 2006.

Among Hispanic voters, 70 percent agreed a candidate's climate stance was important, up from 62 percent in 2006.

Young voters: 53 percent strongly agreed that elected officials should make combating global warming a high priority, a major jump from 38 percent in 2006.

NWF's President and CEO Larry Schweiger offered the following summary of the findings:

"This election was powered by a voting public that wants dramatic and meaningful change, especially when it comes to action to advance a clean energy economy," continued Schweiger. "President-elect Obama and the new Congress have the public support they need to move an ambitious clean energy agenda that measures up to the science of global warming and the full economic potential of our economy."

So how did The Wall Street Journal and Fox get it so wrong? Short answer: intentionally.

Not So Green: Voters Nix Most Environmental State Ballot Measures

Not Easy Being Green

Several of the initiatives the WSJ examined were opposed by environmentalists. I fail to see how this qualifies as voters nixing environmental measures. They also conveniently forgot to mention all of the environmentally friendly initiatives approved by voters on Tuesday. For the record, here are eight:

CA Proposition 1A: Would partially fund a high-speed train linking Southern California with the Bay Area and the Sacramento/San Joaquin Valley.

CA Proposition 2: Would prohibit the confinement of livestock in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, stand up, lie down, or extend their wings and limbs.

FL Amendment 4: Would institute a property-tax exemption for property placed under permanent conservation protection.

Minnesota Clean Water, Wildlife, Cultural Heritage, and Natural Areas Amendment: Would raise the state sales tax by three-eighths of 1 percent in order to increase state funding for natural resource protection and cultural heritage programs.

MO Proposition 3: Would require 15 percent of the state's electricity come from clean energy sources by 2021, and would require that utilities raise consumer rates no more than 1 percent per year to pay for the renewable energy.

Ohio Issue 2: Would authorize the state to borrow $400 million for environmental conservation.

Ohio Issue 3: Would create a constitutional amendment to protect property rights and rights to the reasonable use of water.

Washington Prop. 1: Would provide $18 billion to support mass-transit services and expand light rail into several communities south of Seattle.

It also wouldn't be hard to make the case that the defeat of California Propositions 7 and 10 were victories for environmentalists as well.

In yet another election post-mortem, Fox displays exactly how out of touch they are:

Though the financial crunch should place economy-harming global warming legislation on the back burner, the Natural Resources Defense Council is pushing for it within the first 100 days of the new Congress, supposedly as a means of easing the credit crisis and financing renewable energy projects.

When you come across garbage like this, just remember: 78 percent of voters agree that investing in clean energy is important to revitalizing America's economy.

Given the overwhelming success on statewide ballot initiatives, the pickups in the Senate and the new Zogby poll, it is absolutely clear that Obama has been handed an overwhelming clean energy mandate. Indeed, a Campaign for America's Future report (pdf) found that of the 29 new Democratic members of Congress elected on Tuesday, "28 promoted a green economy, one that ends our reliance on foreign oil, and creates and expands new and clean energy production."

It is also clear that the Wall Street Journal and Fox News are intentionally misleading their readers. Then again, that is to be expected.

While you are here, education yourself on clean coal.

Follow Josh Nelson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/josh_nelson

Comments

[Kir]

09:25 PM on 11/18/2008

I'm a science teacher and while I don't think global warming has or hasn't been proved, there is nothing wrong with living green. I'm not a rich person but have used solar and wind for over thirty years. We don't need to spend millions more on alternativ­e energy research, we just need to start using it. Solar and wind have been used by humanity for thousands of years but "cheap" fossil fuels have changed the way we power things. My home is heated in the winter by a wall of windows that face south and the overhang and trees shade it in the summer. I don't own a heater or air conditione­r though I live where it gets into single and triple digit temperatur­es during the year. This is not HI-Tech but I don't see such things being built in this country. These are just a few of the many simple things that can be done to help our environmen­t, economy, and energy security.

[nivek]

10:00 AM on 11/09/2008

We must build our way out of economic turmoil. Green energy production is the obvious best result method.

[markie1111]

08:47 PM on 11/08/2008

well, let's see if i have this right. there are close to seven billion peeps on the planet. the carrying capacity ( in biological terminolog­y) is around 3 billion, give or take a billion. population pyramids should look like pyramids. so, until such time as we as a species are willing to face the facts headon; we are screwwed. and you can take that to the bank....th­e elephant in the room is being ignored and we don't have the guts to acknowledg­e it presence.

[princessofnowt]

06:50 AM on 11/08/2008

There are a LOT of corporatio­ns out there creating non profit org's who are FRONTS for Corporate Clean Coal and Nuclear.

Including the likes of Repower America, WE, climatepro­tect.org-- ALL FRONTS for Corporate pushes in a cover up lying manner for "Clean Coal " an utter oxymoron, and Nuclear , for which their is no excuse.it is a bad and dangerous option all around..

If any organizati­on is truly for clean and renewable energy, with the clear exclusion of these two dangerous and corporate greed profit motivated fake charity more-of-th­e-same type things, I hope they state so CLEARLY in their Ads, and on their Sites.

Stop the Liars!!!! Only support those orgs who state categorica­lly that they are excluding support for "Clean Coal" and "Nuclear"

REAL Clean Energy ONLY

If anyone knows of any, please let me know. So far I've only come across the corporate front lying orgs, thats who is advertisin­g all over tv.

[J A J]

03:30 PM on 11/07/2008

Michael Crichton had it right in his book "STATE OF FEAR". People now understand global warming is caused by natural variations in solar activity. We are now transition­ing into global cooling as the sun chills out. This election saw Obama win but most Global Warming initiative­s fail, and for good reason. The principle reason is that most consumers, farmers, ranchers and foresters understand two things. First, global warming is good, not bad. Second, carbon in general and carbon dioxide in particular is good, not bad. Higher average temperatur­es together with higher concentrat­ions of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere reduce crop failures and improve crop, grazing and forest production­. Those two factors are the principal forces greening the planet and feeding all of us today. Liberal and eco-cults want to torpedo that winning combinatio­n. Why? Perhaps readers have some ideas here.

[BrettnCalgary]

11:51 AM on 11/08/2008

Perhaps you need better sources than a novel:

http://www­.realclima­te.org/

http://gri­stmill.gri­st.org/ske­ptics