Democrats generally care deeply about climate change, but in choosing a candidate for the coming battle with President Trump there is one issue that reins above all others: electability. Democrats across the country are tying themselves in knots trying to decide who might be able to take down this toxic presidency. This is an unfortunate way to pick a presidential candidate. Instead of listening to the candidates and their policy positions, then deciding who convinces and, more importantly, excites them the most, voters are trying to make an impossible prediction. Democrats have a need to fall in love with their candidates—whoever makes enough of their hearts go pitter patter will be the right one to take on Trump.
That said, beating Trump is the most important way to fight the climate crisis, no matter which Democrat replaces him. The man openly doubts scientific consensus on climate and has shamelessly rolled back environmental protections across the United States and most notably, pulled the U.S. out of the Paris agreement. I’ll stop here because the list is endless. And don’t just take my word for it, take a look at the ongoing list that National Geographic has kept up or another shorter, more organized one that is just as devastating.
The climate crisis is an existential threat to all of us yet the U.S. plays an outsized role in global warming—both as a contributor and as the powerbroker (or defeater) of transnational policy designed to put a halt to it. No other country comes close to the historic CO2 emissions from the U.S. and if you couple that with a president who doesn’t believe in climate change, but rather thinks it’s simply a ruse to slow economic growth, then you have a very dangerous combination for the whole world. This makes what happens in the U.S. next November everybody’s concern all over the world, even if only U.S. citizens are able take part in this consequential decision.
So, putting electability aside, what issues are important to Democratic voters in these primaries? According to polling by FiveThirtyEight/Ipsos poll back in September, the issues Democrats are most interested in are: (1) the ability to beat Trump (39.6%) (2) healthcare (9.9%) (3) the economy (8%) (4) wealth and income inequality (7.9%) and (5) climate change (7.4%). Another poll in December also put climate change in 5th place behind healthcare, immigration, immigration, terrorism/national security and economy and jobs.
These figures might seem disappointing, but they actually represent change for climate change: it’s finally getting some traction as a top issue among Americans. A Pew Research Center poll conducted in January shows that for the first time, nearly as many Americans believe that protecting the environment should be a top policy priority (64%) as those who believe the economy should be (67%). Environmental protection is differentiated from and polls a bit higher, however, than climate change, for which only 52% of respondents chose as a policy priority. Critically, that 64% support for prioritizing protecting the environment is up from 47% in 2016 and the 52% figure is up from only 38% in 2016.
These numbers split deeply when disaggregated by party. Environmental protection and climate change rank near the bottom of priorities for Republicans but near the top for Democrats. In this poll, Democrats prioritize environmental protection, healthcare costs, education, then climate change. Of course, this poll didn’t give Democrats the option to choose changing out the president himself as a policy priority but the strong showing for both the environment and climate change is there.
Gallup also has polling data and they have used it to divide Americans into three subgroups on climate change: concerned believers, the mixed middle and cool skeptics. In 2015, concerned believers overtook the mixed middle in terms of the leading group of public opinion and in 2019, that group represented 51% followed by the mixed middle at a distant second with only 30% and only 20% falling into the cool skeptics category. It’s not surprising that when you disaggregate the data, you again find an enormous gap between Democrats—77% of whom are concerned believers–and Republicans—16% are concerned believers.
While not particularly comparable due to different questions and methodologies, it’s interesting to look at how important climate policy is to EU citizens. Recent data from Bertelsmann Stiftung shows that among EU 27 countries, 40% of the people identify environment as the top priority for the new European Commission, with jobs coming in second at 42%. Spain flips that priority with jobs at 40% and environment at 32%, tied with social security. It’s reasonable to guess that some left-right differences would be revealed if the data were disaggregated.
As with most issues that represent change, public opinion goes first, and leaders will then follow in one way or another. One of the most intractable arguments in international relations is whether or not public opinion does or even should matter when it comes to international policy. Climate policy straddles both the domestic and international agenda, which perhaps gives it some advantage in terms of national electoral politics.
Yet it’s one thing for voters to be more concerned with the environment and climate change and another for the candidates to actually be talking about it. Let’s start with the debates, where we’ve already seen an unprecedented amount of discussion about the climate crises showing that candidates are well aware that this is an important issue for voters. In the November debate, former Vice President Joe Biden referred to climate change as "the" existential threat to humanity, Mayor Pete Buttigieg talked up the idea of a "carbon-negative" farm and hedge fund billionaire and climate activist tom Steyer pledged to declare a climate crises state of emergency during his first day in office if elected.
Even when they haven’t been asked about climate change, candidates have brought it up. In January, one of the moderators ask Senator Bernie Sanders to get back on topic saying “We’re gonna get to climate change but I want to stay on trade.” His reply was, “They are the same issue.” In February, both Senator Elizabeth Warren and Buttigieg brought climate change into their answers about national security. Virtually, all the candidates found ways to tie trade to climate change as a way to get other countries to do their share. Warren favors a border adjustment carbon tax. Senator Amy Klobuchar argued that while new US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement doesn’t address climate change, future ones will and this one is critical to getting on a more even footing with China and being able to push them to do more.
The February debate in Las Vegas, Nevada provided a particularly stark backdrop in terms of climate change which produced a robust discussion of climate change policy. One of the debate moderators, a journalist from the Nevada Independent newspaper noted that Las Vegas is one of the “fastest warming cities in the country” and asked for specific policy proposals that would make the climate livable in the state while not hurting business interests. Biden repeated his line about climate being an existential threat to humanity. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, under attack in his first debate appearance talked about his work to stop the expansion of the use of coal and repeat what all candidates agree on: re-joining the Paris agreement on day one of his presidency.
Warren talked specifics of her policy proposal to stop drilling or mining on all public land, which would very directly affect the state of Nevada, also highlighting that exceptions could be made on specific minerals on a case by case basis. More controversially, Sanders favors total ban on hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” and was asked “What do you tell these workers who will lose their jobs?” He spoke to the existential nature of the issue, “this is a moral issue, my friends.” In contrast, Klobuchar, sees fracking as “transitional fuel” that can’t just be banned outright while recognizing that “this is a crisis.” Warren posited that “we can have a green new deal and create jobs” and then went deeper into why Democrats can’t get climate legislation passed. According to her, this has to do with 1) corruption (which she has a plan to fight) and the filibuster, which effectively gives the fossil fuel industry a veto on all legislation.
And all of the candidates have climate change proposals in their programs outlined on their websites for voters to peruse. And there are quite a few places where voters can go for comparison between candidates on the issues, such as Vox.com’s excellent guide to how Democrats plan to fight climate change. Climate challenges run deep and wide, but there are some specific policies that are getting the most attention, starting with the Green New Deal that was sponsored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA). Sanders, Warren and Klobuchar are all sponsors and Biden and Buttigieg, who are not currently members of Congress, are supporters. Bloomberg opposes it because he believes it cannot get passed in the Senate.
There is more division when it gets even more specific, such as nuclear energy, taxing carbon, prosecuting polluters and fracking. It’s also important to note that there have been two climate crises issue candidates in the race, hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer, who continues and former Washington State governor Jay Inslee. Issue candidates run on one issue, often just to bring more attention to it, such as Andrew Yang’s advocacy of a universal basic income.
Are voters indeed supporting the candidates who are offering big policy ideas on climate change? Findings are mixed. Sanders might have the most radical policy proposals in terms of climate, Pew Research Center data does show a slight preference for Warren, who has the biggest share of supporters (91%) who believe that climate change is a very big issue, with Buttigieg coming next with 87% of his supporters and Sanders third, at 84%.
Perhaps most important is whether climate change will be a winning issue for the eventual Democratic candidate in November. There is little evidence that many true swing voters actually exist anymore, which means exciting the base is the name of the game. Therefore, climate should continue to bring out voters and give them another reason to vote besides ending the Trump nightmare. Then, the data seems to indicate that any real independents or the very few Republican never-Trump-ers might agree with a Democratic candidate on climate, but it’s doubtful that that would be the issue to bring them over to a Democratic vote, even with Trump’s extreme stand. It will be a good issue for any Democratic nominee to beat Trump up with in the fall and even if it’s not the pivotal issue in the general election, the party base and other activists will hopefully remain steadfast in holding any Democrat who makes it to the White House accountable for their promises made now.
This article was published in Spanish in esglobal.