After the preparations had been made, the tally sheets from our phone calls completed, the carpools worked out, and the volunteers scheduled, I headed to Los Angeles with the hope that after the weekend was complete, there would be no question in the minds of the CDP delegates that Gavin Newsom has the grassroots support necessary to win the Lt. Governor’s race against whatever the GOP throws at us in November.

In the weeks prior to the convention, our team of students from all across the state had been talking to delegates, volunteers, and fellow young voters about Mayor Newsom’s candidacy and about his bold, new ideas that will be required to dig California out of our seemingly never ending state of economic misery.

The pitch was not hard to make. Young people are drawn to Newsom’s campaign. We see public higher education becoming unaffordable to more and more Californians. We fear that in five or ten years our state won’t be able to compete in an evolving global economy, and we worry that the living wage jobs that we will need in order to support our families will be harder and harder to find. While we are confident that our state will come to its senses when it comes to Gay Marriage and LGBT rights, we are concerned that the relentless beat of the status quo won’t provide the framework necessary to drastically change the way we look at issues like immigration, the environment, and budget & tax reform. We have watched the forces of regressiveness drag our state (and our futures) under the surface, and we are ready and eager to support Gavin Newsom, who has proven time and time again in San Francisco that tangible change is not only possible, but it is also necessary.

This is why over 100 enthusiastic volunteers showed up to the state Democratic Party convention this weekend in support of Gavin Newsom. If you were in LA, you may have seen us trailing the candidate as he greeted throngs of excited delegates in the hallways, waiting in the back of crowded caucus rooms to welcome him and hear him speak, or waving signs and holding coffees while passing out muffins on a street corner early on Saturday morning.

The high number of young people supporting Gavin Newsom’s campaign for LG is a testament to the appeal of his dynamic candidacy and engaging personality. Young voters are the bellwether of the coming decades of California Politics, and we are ready to not only vote for, but also work to produce real change. We came out in full force for President Obama, we overwhelmingly opposed Props 4 and 8, and we vented our fear and anger over cuts to higher education during protests up and down the state this past year.

Young people have proven over the last two years that we are ready to lead the next wave of progressive politics in this state. We look at Sacramento and see a broken system that needs fixing, quickly. Income inequality is on the rise, unemployment is approaching record highs, and an archaic budget and tax code protects the interests of the most conservative politicians in the state and stifles any hope of reform. At the same time, we turn to San Francisco and see a city with universal healthcare, universal pre-school, paid sick-leave, and the highest minimum wage in the nation, and we are given a reason to have hope for the future. Because of his track record, my generation feels that we share a vision for the future with Gavin Newsom.  Because of this, we are ready to ensure that he has the opportunity to prove himself on a statewide level. If you were at the convention last weekend, you may have caught a glimpse of that.

You can join Students for Gavin Newsom on Facebook: facebook.com/studentsfornewsom

Over the past week, Sarah Palin encouraged Tea-Party candidates to make energy issues a central part of their campaigns. “There’s nothing stopping us from achieving energy independence that a good old national election can’t fix,” she said.  

Palin’s full of surprises, but this piece of campaign advice caught me off-guard. After all, a recent poll found that energy is the issue that inspires the most faith in Democratic lawmakers. Since President Obama made clean energy a central part of their campaign in 2008, this poll suggests that this is what the majority of people want.  Therefore, Democrats AND Republicans should all be running on clean energy.

Tea-partiers are always more than welcome to pontificate &peddle” more of the same”, blathering about dirty, old energy technologies that date back to the 19th century.

When in fact it will be bold Republicans and smart Democrats that support clean, innovative, job generating “energy ideas” that will truly get a lift by campaigning on energy.

Eight years of “Drill, baby, Drill,” during the Bush administration got us exactly where we are now – in trouble and dependent on foreign oil. But that isn’t what the American voters want now. American voters want progress and they want jobs.  The clean energy plan at the center of the economic package, which just approved a $100 million investment in smart grid technology, will lead to 30,000 Americans getting new job training.

These are the energy policies that Americans will have the most faith in. And that’s why I encourage the undecided Senators out there–those lawmakers and candidates from both parties who have been quiet about clean energy and climate legislation–to step forward and declare their support for a clean energy future for America and show some leadership.

Rather than being scared about what the Tea Party will say in response, lawmakers should be listening to American voters. People want to see progress right now, not more Congressional gridlock.

Comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation is primed for passing. It has already passed in the House. A new Senate bill is expected to become public in the coming days and will have tri-partisan support in the Senate thanks to Senators Kerry (D), Graham (R), and Lieberman (I). After the bill is unveiled, negotiating will begin in earnest.  Forward movement is further propelled by the White House backing, thanks to President Obama’s repeated requests for a bill to be delivered to his desk. And it has already gone through numerous hearings and been thoroughly debated on the Hill.

Senators should pass a clean energy and climate bill this summer and head into the final campaign push with a real success in hand–an action plan to deliver on the three of the most pressing issues for American voters right now:

• Jobs: The clean energy and climate bill that passed the House last just is projected to create nearly 2 million jobs. In fact, for every $1 million invested in clean energy, we can create 3 to 4 times as many jobs as if we spent the same amount on fossil fuels.

• The Economy: There is a consensus among economists that America can prevent the worst impacts of climate change without hurting the economy. As Paul Krugman explained recently, the House bill would leave the American economy between 1.1 percent and 3.4 percent smaller in 2050 than it would be otherwise.

• National Security: This week, the U.S. Military warned that oil would be in dangerously short supply in the next few years, exacerbating political tensions and around the world. In contrast, Think Progress found that clean energy and climate legislation would reduce Iran’s petrodollar receipts by $1.8 trillion through 2050. That’s an average of $100 million per day that doesn’t fall into the hands of a regime that sponsors extremist groups around the world!

These are the kind of real numbers that Americans are looking for. That’s why those up for reelection this fall should run on a positive, forward-looking energy policy instead of the 19th century leftover rhetoric that Palin is dishing out.

Heather Taylor-Miesle is the director of the NRDC Action Fund. Become a fan on Facebook or Twitter.

If you go to the website for the US Chamber of Commerce (USCOC), America’s “voice of business” that claims to represent the interests of over 3 million businesses, it feels like you’ve found the site for a right wing advocacy group. There are clips from FOX News (that aren’t making fun of them), attacks on healthcare and financial regulatory reform, and links to Wall Street Journal op-eds claiming that America has more to fear from the political influence of labor unions than from corporations with annual profits in the billions. The implication is clear — American businesses have right wing values.

However, this assertion was challenged in 2009 when USCOC announced its opposition to attempts by the federal government to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. USCOC said that doing so would “strangle the economy”, called for a “Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century” as if human-caused climate change was yet to be proven, and threatened to sue the EPA if it decided to act without holding the trial. In response, Nike resigned from USCOC’s board of directors, and major companies like Apple, Pacific Gas and Electric, PNM Resources and Exelon left USCOC completely.

It turns out that when it comes to climate change, US businesses aren’t so conservative after all. That’s why a group like American Businesses for Clean Energy (ABCE) is so important. And if you own a business and believe the US should be doing more to fight climate change and help support the clean energy economy (which is creating jobs at 2.5 times the rate as the rest of the economy), you should seriously consider joining ABCE.

ABCE represents over 2,500 businesses of all shapes and sizes, including big companies like Gap Inc. and Warner Music Group as well as small local businesses from Al’s Painting in Ann Arbor, MI to Zoey’s Pizza in Manchester, NH. You don’t need to be a business that focuses on green products or services to join — all are welcome. There are no fees or dues to pay, no meetings to attend, no further obligations, and ABCE will not engage in any lobbying on your behalf. You don’t need to resign from any other business coalitions. All you have to do to join is visit ABCE’s website and enter some basic information about your business.

That’s it. You’re done. But you will have done something incredibly important.

Congress needs to know that USCOC does not speak for you, and that there are businesses of every kind in every state that support strong climate and clean energy legislation. They need to know that you don’t buy the right wing’s scaremongering that reducing greenhouse gas emissions will ruin the economy, especially when there is so much evidence that moving to a clean energy economy will create much-needed jobs and reduce dependence on foreign oil while improving the health of both people and the environment. You will have told Congress that your business is ready for a cleaner, sustainable, more prosperous future, and you want them to pass the legislation needed to make it happen. And while California is clearly a leader in green businesses as well as environmental awareness, CA businesses are currently underrepresented in ABCE. That’s got to change.

If you own a business, you are in a unique position of influence, and joining ABCE is a great, easy way to help the economy and the environment. If you don’t own a business, you can help by telling friends who are business owners about ABCE or recommend it to businesses that you frequent.

If history has shown us anything, it’s that when businesses speak, Congress listens. ABCE will make sure your voice is heard.  

Stealthily and without fanfare, a petition has been launched to get a measure on the November ballot suspending AB 32, California’s landmark legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions and spur green job growth. So who is funding the signature drive? None other than San Antonio-based oil refiners Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp. — the #7 and #8 biggest polluters in California. From the LA Times:

Two Texas-based refinery giants have pledged as much as $2 million to fund signature gathering for a ballot initiative to suspend California’s landmark global warming law [AB 32], according to Sacramento sources.

The companies, Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp., own refineries in California that would be forced under the law to slash emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

But neither Valero or Tesoro is owning up to it.

A Tesoro spokesman did not respond to inquiries. But the company’s website invites visitors to lobby Congress to ensure “fair” climate legislation and fight any effort by the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

Bill Day, a Valero spokesman, declined to confirm or deny the company’s involvement, saying that “any contributions would come out in normal disclosures” under California’s campaign laws.

And neither is Dan Logue (R-Marysville), one of the initiative’s main sponsors. From NYTimes:

Dan Logue, the Republican assemblyman behind the suspension, also refused to discuss where funds had originated.

So forget about the astroturf groups claiming the movement to kill AB 32 is a bunch of small local businesses worried about their survival in a tough economy. The mask is off the anti-AB 32 movement, and behind it is exactly what we thought we would find: big oil, big pollution, big corporations and the corporatist Republicans who love them. That’s why Logue, Valero and Tesoro refuse to admit where the money for the ballot initiative is coming from, even if it means possibly violating California Fair Political Practices Committee regulations. The fact that Texas Big Oil is funding an initiative to keep California’s air dirty and kill its burgeoning green economy is a PR nightmare.

So let’s have no more illusions about what the move to kill AB 32 is all about.

Killing AB 32 is not about job creation or lowering unemployment. Valero and Tesoro don’t care about creating jobs or lowering unemployment in a state over 1,000 miles away from them since that won’t increase their profits. If they did care about job creation, they would be supporting AB 32 since California’s clean/green economy is creating jobs at a rate 2.5 times faster than the rest of the economy while attracting billions in venture capital investment, including an announcement this week that Kyocera will be opening a plant in San Diego to manufacture solar modules. Besides, the Varshney/Tootelian report that AB 32 opponents often cite to prove that AB 32 will kill jobs and hurt the economy has been exposed by numerous economists, the Union of Concerned Scientists and the California Budget Project as being fatally, almost cartoonishly flawed, with one pair of economists calling it “one of the worst examples of schlock science we’ve ever seen.” Even Sanjay Varshney, one of the report’s co-authors, admitted that the report is “not exhaustive” and now seems to be backing away from its conclusions.

The move to kill AB 32 is about even more astronomical profits for Big Oil, regardless of whom or what it harms. Valero and Tesoro don’t care that hundreds of Californians die every year from respiratory illnesses aggravated by pollution, or that the adverse health effects of pollution disproportionately fall on minorities. They don’t care that the top four most polluted cities in the country are in California or that Californians breath some of the dirtiest air in America, with 95% of Californians living in areas with unhealthy air.

In fact, Valero and Tesoro want California’s air to become even more dirty and dangerous because they profit from pollution. Instead of being ethical and responsible and cleaning up their own mess, they can make even more by “socializing” and externalizing the cost of pollution — making Californians pay for it in the form of taxpayer-funded environmental cleanups, increased medical bills and lost work days stemming from pollution-related illness, and premature death. Tesoro claims it wants “fair” climate legislation when the most “fair” thing they could do is to clean up their own pollution instead of making others deal with it. And while they adamantly oppose any legislation that puts a price on carbon, the truth is that Valero and Tesoro know that carbon already has a price — the extra profits they make by not cleaning up the carbon pollution they generate.

Call Valero at (210) 345-2000 and/or email Tesoro and tell them what you think of what they’re doing. They’ll try to redirect you to a PR firm, but be insistent. And if anything, tell them that you and all of your friends will never, ever buy their gas again.

We’ve already had out-of-state interests stick their nose in to tell Californians who we can marry. Let’s make sure out-of-state Big Oil doesn’t dictate what kind of air we’re forced breath.

Last week, two conservative Republican Senators, James Inhofe of Oklahoma and John Barrasso of Wyoming, called for an independent probe of the IPCC — the international scientific body that summarizes the latest climate science — and asked the Senate to halt all climate action until that happens.  

The senators claim that because there were some errors included in the IPCC’s 2007 report — for instance, how quickly the Himalayan glaciers might melt — the entire phenomenon of climate change must now be questioned.

I am not a scientist by training, but even I know their reasoning doesn’t hold up.  The few errors that have been uncovered in the thousand pages or so of the IPCC report have nothing to do with the science of whether and why climate change is occurring.  Instead, those errors are about a few specific projections about what might happen in the future.

Saying we should discard the entire thrust of climate scientist because of a couple of sloppy projections is like saying the concept of evaporation is in doubt because a handful of scientists mistakenly said Lake Mead evaporates faster than we thought.  

Senator Inhofe and Barrasso are trying to use this excuse to ignore the IPCC (which stands for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). But it won’t be so easy to get around the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Science Foundation, the Pentagon, the National Intelligence Council, the World Health Organization, and the CIA.

Each and every one of these world-class institutions has concluded that climate change is a serious threat.    

But let’s face it, people like Inhofe will never be persuaded by scientific argument. Climate denial is an article of faith for them, and I don’t believe in arguing about people’s religion.

But I do argue politics, and on the issues that matter most to Americans right now — jobs, the economy, and security — climate action makes good political sense.

So even if Inhofe’s posturing about the IPCC gives  some Senators pause, they can’t ignore the following facts.

Fact: Climate Action Will Create Jobs

Every senator running for reelection this year has one question to answer: where are the jobs? Voters are hungry for opportunities, and a clean energy and climate bill will deliver them.

Clean energy jobs are growing 2.5 times as fast as traditional jobs right now. Indeed, according to economists at the University of California, the climate bill that passed the House of Representatives last June could generate nearly 2 million new jobs.

Why so many opportunities? Clean energy industries require more people than those in the fossil fuel industry. In fact, for every $1 million spent on clean energy, we can create 3 to 4 times as many jobs as if we spent the same amount on fossil fuels.

Some senators have the defeatist attitude that China will capture the clean energy market because of its low wages. In fact, A recent study by the EPIA (for which Barclay’s vetted the data) found that 75 percent of all solar energy jobs are in installation and maintenance and the trend is similar for other clean energy technologies.

You can’t outsource the job of building a wind farm or making an office more energy efficient.

But here is another fact: the only way to get these jobs benefits is to pass a clean energy and climate bill. Without that bill, businesses don’t get the incentive to invest in job-heavy, low-carbon energy sources. And without those jobs, Senators will have a much harder time talking to their voters.

Fact: Climate Action Will Generate Economic Growth

Many economists believe that we need a new engine for growth. We need individuals and companies to invest in something on a massive scale in order to instill confidence and create jobs.

Clean energy and climate solutions fit the bill. Annual investments in the global clean energy market could reach $106 to $230 billion a year in 2020 and as much as $424 billion in 2030. What other sector is offering that kind of growth right now?

But in order to unleash private investment, companies need the right incentives. Peter Darbee, the head of PG&E, wrote in the Capitol Hill newspaper Politico that America’s utilities need about $2 trillion over the next 20 years to modernize electrical infrastructure. But, he said, companies are delaying capital spending because, while they know climate legislation is coming, they don’t know when and they don’t know what it will look like. In the meantime, they are holding onto their cash and postponing job creation.

Darbee urged Congress to pass a climate bill because, he wrote, it will “clear the way for many companies to accelerate near-term investment and job creation. Longer term, it would enhance America’s economic competitiveness and national security.”

Fact: Climate Action Will Strengthen Our National Security

The Christmas bomber put security back on the list of top priorities for many American voters. It was a terrible reminder that distant unrest can wash up on our shores.

And that’s what the Department of Defense is worried about when it comes to climate change. A few weeks ago, the Pentagon released its Quadrennial Defense Review–its official assessment of military risks–and it called climate change a threat to national security that “may spark or exacerbate future conflicts,” and labeled global warming “an accelerant of instability.” The Central Intelligence Agency and the National Intelligence Council came to similar conclusions.

If we stay on our current path –ignoring climate change and continuing to fuel it with our oil addiction–the risks will only grow. Americans spent a record $450 billion on imported oil in 2008–$1,400 for every man, woman, and child in this country. This money was sent overseas to places like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Nigeria. Do you think those regimes have our best interests in mind?

Retired Navy Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn explained it like this: “Our growing reliance on fossil fuels jeopardizes our military and affects a huge price tag in dollars and potentially lives… In our judgment, a business-as-usual approach constitutes a threat to our national security.”

A clean energy and climate bill will disarm that threat, protect our servicemen and women, and keep billions of dollars here in America.

Senators Inhofe and Barrasso can argue over the science as much as they want.  The scientific community can and will defend the science behind climate change.  While they have that debate, there are lots of additional, incredibly important reasons to get started…. So, let’s not wait.

This blog post was originally posted at The Markup

The #1 argument by corporations and politicians who oppose reducing pollution, fighting climate change and moving America to a cleaner, greener, more sustainable future is that doing so will cost the country jobs and hurt the economy. In fact, since many corporations and politicians claim to believe that climate change is a serious issue that must be dealt with (eventually), the “sustainability = job killer” argument is essentially the only one they have.

And it’s a lie — scaremongering from dirty energy companies so they can keep polluting at current levels, protect their unsustainable energy monopoly and maximize their short-term profits. They claim that responsibly cleaning up their own poisonous mess — instead of “socializing” the cost of dealing with it by spewing it into the air or dumping it in our oceans and streams — will force them to raise energy rates. This is a way to blackmail small businesses into defending the status quo and joining their efforts to kill any legislation that promotes efforts to reduce pollution or invest in sustainable energy. But the dirty energy companies are simply fighting to be the last of the dinosaurs, forestalling the inevitable day when they join the fossils that created their fortunes.

The green economy isn’t some untested theory or pie-in-the-sky fantasy — it’s already here, and its kicking butt. So here are some links that show why reducing pollution and embracing sustainable energy and green technology will create jobs and give our economy the boost it needs.

If you think the green economy won’t create jobs, you might want to tell those dirty hippies at the multinational bank HSBC, who found this in a 2009 report:

Global revenues from climate-related businesses such as energy efficiency rose by 75 percent in 2008 to $530 billion and could exceed $2 trillion by 2020, HSBC Global Research estimated on Friday.

In the 2006 Stern Review on the economics of climate change, climate-related revenues were forecast to climb to $500 billion by 2050.

“We can see that this seemingly huge figure has already been surpassed well ahead of time as more and more businesses adapt their business model,” said Joaquim de Lima, global head of quant research for equities at HSBC.

You also might want to tell the Chinese. A January New York Times article found that China’s decision to become the leader in producing solar panels, wind turbines and other renewable energy technologies is paying off:

Renewable energy industries [in China] are adding jobs rapidly, reaching 1.12 million in 2008 and climbing by 100,000 a year, according to the government-backed Chinese Renewable Energy Industries Association.

The Pew Charitable Trusts released a report finding that, despite “a lack of sustained government support”, America’s clean energy economy grew two and a half times faster than overall jobs from 1998 to 2007.

Pew found that jobs in the clean energy economy grew at a national rate of 9.1 percent, while traditional jobs grew by only 3.7 percent between 1998 and 2007.  There was a similar pattern at the state level, where job growth in the clean energy economy outperformed overall job growth in 38 states and the District of Columbia during the same period.

A group of economists at Economics for Equity & Environment released a study this week that found that reducing emissions, becoming energy independent through clean energy and embracing the green economy would generate net job growth. The study goes on to debunk many of the myths that say reducing emissions and investing in the green economy would hurt the larger economy. A study by the Union of Concerned Scientists came to the same conclusions about the green economy generating job growth, as did a recent study conducted by UC Berkeley that examined the effects that implementing the Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32) would have on California’s economy.

But the clean, green gravy train is leaving the station, and if America isn’t careful, we could miss it. Michael Northrop tells us that “the clean energy gold rush” has already begun. However, due to a lack of policies to provide a stable marketplace for green tech investment, we’re letting that $2 trillion slip through our fingers:  

Even with growing unemployment, America seems incapable of recognizing a golden opportunity. With no goal or effective policy framework, not only are we shipping oil dollars to the Middle East, we are watching our solar, wind, and other renewable energy dollars begin flowing to Asia. (snip)

Without the economic security of guaranteed purchase contracts, companies will keep relocating overseas. Evergreen Solar, an up-and-coming solar manufacturer in Massachusetts, recently disclosed all of its manufacturing will be based in China.

So don’t let yourself or anyone else be fooled by the dirty energy industry’s lies. They want our heads in the tar sands because relying on fossil fuels makes them money, regardless of what it does to the environment, your health or anything else. And they’re not the only ones. As Thomas Friedman wrote in a NYTimes op-ed this week:  

Indeed, I suspect China is quietly laughing at us right now. And Iran, Russia, Venezuela and the whole OPEC gang are high-fiving each other. Nothing better serves their interests than to see Americans becoming confused about climate change, and, therefore, less inclined to move toward clean-tech and, therefore, more certain to remain addicted to oil.

Five Things to Say about Clean Energy in Your Address

It is that time of year again.  This Wednesday, January 27, 2010, the President will glide down the aisle in the House of Representatives, greeted by thunderous applause, and encounter the usually more dignified elected officials in a slightly teen-bopper, Beatles-esque-frenzy, practically climbing over each other to shake his hand.  

He will ascend the rostrum in front of federal government and the nation and proceed to tell us how our country is doing. Within the first five minutes of the speech, President Obama will say the health of our nation is strong – because what else can a President say?  The State of the Union address is largely an exercise in tradition.  So, why then does it matter what he says?

It matters because behind all the ritual rhetoric lies a pretty good indicator of what the president will focus on in the coming months.

Which is also exactly why so many political pundits have been theorizing about the President’s speech for weeks now.  Speculation has reached a fever-pitch with the stunning yet not surprising election of Senator-elect Scott Brown (R-MA) and the equally shocking Supreme Court decision last week, which some have argued, gave corporations the right to basically buy Congressional seats. Every public interest group in Washington is hoping – praying really – that their issue will rise to the level of a “shout out” from the President.  We all desperately want the President to acknowledge (via his SOTU speech) that what we each work on is a top priority.  

You can be certain that is what the community working for clean energy and climate solutions is hoping for – a shout out.  

There have been many predictions in recent days about the death of a climate bill.  Those predictions could be turned on their heads and dispelled with just a few sentences on Wednesday.  In my ideal world, this is what President Obama would say:

1. “Investing in clean energy and climate solutions will generate jobs for Americans.”

President Obama has already hinted he will talk about job creation in his address. That’s no surprise: it is the most urgent priority for American families right now.

One of the best ways to get Americans back to work is to give them the job of building a clean energy economy and rebuilding American infrastructure. As soon as we set limits on global warming pollution, we will unleash billions of dollars in private investment for low-carbon solutions like energy efficient windows and batteries for hybrid cars.

That investment will create jobs–nearly 2 million, according to economists at the University of California.

2. “We are losing jobs to our overseas competitors everyday.”

We are getting the pants beat off us by our international competitors.  According to the Green, Inc. blog over at the NY Times, “At the beginning of 2009, Chinese solar companies supplied 21 percent of the market; by year’s end their stake had more than doubled.” They are winning in the pricing game: “A Chinese module maker with little name recognition in the United States, Yingli, has captured 27 percent of the California market thanks to low pricing, the report said. Suntech, China’s leading module-maker, has a 10 percent share in California.”  We need to get ourselves in gear if we are going to compete.  

3. “Our dependence on foreign oil is unpatriotic.”

I am a mom with an SUV (granted a Honda CRV, but nonetheless, a SUV.) I love my SUV – I can shove kids, tricycles, backpacks, extra clothes, groceries, and even a box for Goodwill in the back and still have room for a family dog.  But I can’t pretend that my choice has no repercussions to our national security.

Every time I fill up, I am lining the pockets of those who hate America.  Almost all of us “soccer moms and dads” in our SUVs are in the same boat.  We need to drive something functional that doesn’t feed terrorism.  I don’t think that means that we need to buy tinier cars (although that may be part of the solution) – I think it means that we must make more efficient, cleaner cars. And the best way to do that is to give Detroit and other automakers the incentives they need to get the job done.



4. “An energy bill alone is not enough.”

This weekend the NYTimes notes in an editorial about climate, “The jobs argument should impress the Senate. Yet many Democrats as well as Republicans seem willing to settle for what would be the third energy bill in five years – loans for nuclear power, mandates for renewable energy, new standards for energy efficiency. These are all useful steps. But the only sure way to unlock the investments required to transform the way the country produces and delivers energy is to put a price on carbon.”

We keep writing checks for clean energy investments but we aren’t getting the most bang for our buck.  If we don’t place a price on pollution, we will only see some of the benefit.  In order to get the most for our money, we need to let the market work – and that means making those who pollute pay for their fair share



5. “Addressing climate change must be more than just a sound bite – it must be a process by which we will commit to get a bill passed this spring.”

Luntz also found that the public overwhelming believes that climate change is occurring – even 66% of Republicans think that global warming is likely happening – so now it is time to stop fighting about it and do something.

If you look on most Senate websites, you will find a statement about how climate change exists and we should do something about it.  We need to turn that lip service into action.  

Is the President likely to say all of this?  Maybe not.  But if he even gets half way there, I think we will be able to repeat that great Twain quote when it comes to a climate change bill: “Rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.”  

Tell POTUS That This Is Our Moment

In case you are tired of making your own New Year’s resolutions, President Obama would like you to help him set his. He is inviting Americans to tell him what we think the administration’s priorities should be for 2010.  

I love that the president of the United States is asking us for our opinions. How refreshing is that? You can share your ideas by clicking here.

I instinctively knew what I wanted to tell him, right away. In fact, it took much less time to figure out his resolution than it did to decide on no new spandex for myself.

I want the White House to focus on getting clean energy and climate legislation passed in the Senate as soon as possible.

We need to get moving on climate solutions NOW. I believe this as a mother–I don’t want to my children to deal with acute water shortages or flooded homes. I need this as a taxpayer–clean energy investments and domestic manufacturing jobs are just the kind of jumpstart our economy desperately needs.  I understand this as a Christian – we should be good stewards of the planet that God gave us.

And as a political junkie my gut also tells me that we will never have a better political environment for passing a clean energy and climate bill than the moment we have right now.  This is our moment.

What could be gained by putting off climate change legislation?  Are the issues going to change?  Is climate going to become an easier problem to solve?  Are big polluters going to stop opposing action?  Are Democrats going to control more than 60 seats in the Senate?    

This is a wake up call, one that I hope the handful of senators (featured in a recent Politico story) hears. These folks would like to delay the bill to some indefinite time in the future. Can someone please explain to me exactly how it is going to get easier in the future?  .

A few senators have said they think we should delay the climate vote in favor of a jobs bill, but the effervescent truth is the climate bill is a jobs bill. According to a recent study from the University of California, we will generate nearly 2 million additional jobs by investing in clean and sustainable energy.

These smart opportunities will be spread across all 50 states. Let’s take Ohio. UMass has estimated that Ohio alone could produce almost 70,000 net new jobs–opportunities for steelworks who build wind turbines, construction workers who retrofit buildings to make them more energy efficient, and software engineers who do energy audits.

We need these jobs now, not in 2011.

Americans want progress. That’s what we voted for in the last election, but we need to see some signs of movement and success. Saving the planet and creating jobs at the same time sounds pretty darn successful to me. We might just be inspired to reward the senators who deliver that success with our votes come November.

In the meantime, tell the White House what you want it to achieve this year.

I am resolved.

Follow NRDC Action Fund on Facebook