– Climate has been dismissed as a small and peculiar matter, says Henrik Heldahl, commentator at amerikanspolitikk.no. With just weeks to go until the US presidential election, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump are in a dead heat. Both are now fighting for the swing voters with laws related to immigration, crime, the economy and health. But in a final sprint in the shadow of two devastating hurricanes, strengthened by global warming, one topic is barely mentioned: climate. Trump is clear that climate is not a high priority for him (more on this shortly). But Harris has worked with climate for several years, and has results to show for it. Harris represented the United States during last year’s climate summit in Dubai. Photo: Kamran Jebreili / AP Kamala’s climate policy – some examples: As a senator, she promoted electric school buses and measures to increase agriculture’s resilience to drought. She was at the forefront of supporting the Green New Deal. As California attorney general, she secured damages from Chevron and BP for allegations of violations of pollution laws. And from Volkswagen for emissions cheating. She ran for president in 2020 with a promise of 10,000 billion investment in climate over the next decade. In this presidential campaign, the whistle has taken on a different sound, or rather, a lack of sound. – I have noticed that she does not emphasize climate so much at her election meetings, says Professor Guri Bang at NMBU, an expert on American climate policy. In his speech to the Democratic National Convention, Harris mentioned climate once: “(…) the freedoms to breathe clean air and drink clean water and live free from the pollution that is driving the climate crisis.” During the debate with Trump, she boasted that the US has become the world’s largest oil producer, and went back on previous opposition to fracking. This is a clear strategy, experts believe. Gas and fracking is one of the issues that has dominated the debate about the swing state of Pennsylvania. Photo: REBECCA DROKE / AFP Culture war and division – Climate has become part of identity politics, says Bang. The division between the parties started in the nineties and has only grown, she explains. Today, 12 percent of Republicans and those who lean that way believe climate should be a top priority for the president and Congress, according to polls from Pew. On the democratic side, it is 59 percent. This year, climate is also lower on the priority list among all voters, according to several surveys. Thus, Harris has little to gain by talking loudly about the climate crisis, Heldahl believes. – It is not a big deal for swing voters. It is a big deal for many young and highly educated Democratic voters, and they vote for Kamala Harris anyway, says Heldahl. Young people outside the office of JD Vance, Trump’s vice presidential candidate. They are demonstrating against his financial ties to the fossil fuel industry. Photo: ANDREW HARNIK / AFP – Is this a strategy? – Yes, she wants to appear as moderate and uncontroversial as possible. A candidate who talks about the core issues that are important to as many voters as possible. Economy is number one, but also immigration, crime and abortion. Harris can also lose out if there is too much focus on climate, Heldahl believes. – Then it will be very easy for Trump. Then he can present a lot of rhetoric about energy production from fossil sources, which is popular in the USA, and draw a caricature of Harris as a left-wing activist. Guri Bang believes Harris talks about climate policy in a new way that is strongly linked to one of her and Biden’s biggest political victories. Green fingers during a state visit to Zambia in 2023. Photo: Angela Nandeka / AP Would rather talk about the “carrot” As vice-president, Harris cast the decisive vote so that the huge climate change package Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) gained a majority in the Senate. The IRA is the largest investment in climate action in US history. By 2030, this could cut emissions by around 40 per cent compared to 2005, several calculations show. – She would rather talk about that than the more traditional climate rhetoric about climate cuts, regulations and carbon tax, which is not as popular among the population. She rather chooses to highlight the positive effects of that strategy, with lots of carrots for new investments in green transition, new jobs and green industrial policy, says Bang. Among other things, the IRA will make it more affordable for ordinary people to install solar cells on the roof, which Photo: Michael Conroy / AP IRA has led to greater investments in republican states than in democratic ones, adds Henrik Heldahl. Nearly 78 percent have so far been allocated to Republican areas, according to an analysis published by CNN this summer. – So it is not an issue that is only good for democratic voters, explains Heldahl. Support for solar and wind power is high among Americans, according to Pew. But it has fallen since 2020. Along with the general engagement of the population. However, warming, extreme weather, drought, wildfires and other climate-induced destruction continue regardless of people’s level of engagement. For those concerned with cutting emissions and slowing down the most serious consequences of climate change, the choice is clear anyway, experts believe. The alternative goes in the complete opposite direction. Flaring of, among other things, the strong greenhouse gas methane, at an oil and gas plant in Texas. Photo: David Goldman / AP “Drill, baby, drill!” and climate hoax Donald Trump has called climate change a hoax. He wants to stop the money not yet spent on IRAs, which he calls the “Green New Scam.” And he will once again withdraw the United States, the world’s second largest emitter, from the Paris Agreement. He also promises “Drill, baby, drill!” on day one. In other words: more fossil energy, quickly. Trump is campaigning in Michigan this summer. Supporter behind holds placards with the slogan “drill, baby, drill!” Photo: Brian Snyder / Reuters According to an analysis by Carbon Brief, four new years of Trump’s policy could result in four billion tonnes of extra emissions by 2030, compared to Biden’s plans. This corresponds to one year of emissions from the 140 countries in the world that emit the least, according to the analysis. – Trump’s position is that the United States should not do anything to combat climate change, unless it is profitable. So he does not want to invest in that, says Heldahl. He still does not think it will be easy to remove the entire IRA, precisely because a lot of money goes to republican states. – It would be unpopular to go back on it now. Several climate organizations have so far stood behind Harris in the election campaign. – The best thing we can do for the climate is to make sure that Harris wins, says Jack Pratt, political director of Environmental Defense Fund Action to the website Semafor. EDF and other climate groups have spent $50 million on advertising for Harris in swing states. The first three ads also did not contain the words “climate change” or “global warming,” according to Axios. Published 20.10.2024, at 08.23
ttn-69
That’s why Kamala Harris doesn’t talk about climate – news – Climate
