environmental policy

Yufu Wang

Dr. Schoolman

Politics of Environmental Issues

Insight:

Presidential Candidates’ Positons of Energy Regulation

While people worldwide celebrate the success of the climate summit in

Paris

—

both

China and the United States committed to cut

carbon emission, and together with

other nations pledged to cover 69% of the global climate pollution

—

new energy policies

are

under

heated

debates

in

America.

The

heat

of

presidential

campaign

in

the

air,

candidates are all in full swing to position themselves about what climate change and new

energy mean to American.

Martin O’Malley

, democratic presidential candidate, believes

in the benefits of government regulation on the environment. Being a strong supporter of

EPA, he advocates zero- tolerance regulation in pipe fracking and methane leaking (The

Des

Monies

Register,

2016).

O’

Malley

also

claims

that

renewable

energy

sources

is

going

to

become

“the

biggest

business

and

job

creation

opportunity

we’ve

seen

in

a

hundred

years”

(Concord

Monitor,

2015).On

the

other

side

of

the

debate,

republican

candidate

Rand

Paul

argues

that

EPA’s

“ambitious

overreach

”

impairs

individual

freedom and suffocates job creation, which, as he claims, costs more than 5 percent of the

US annual gross domestic product(The Washington Times, 2011). Increasing exploration

of domestic oil, gas and mining, according to Paul, will improve nation energy security

(Rand Paul Web, 2015). The distinctive perspectives of these two candidatesseem both

supported by solid data

and

evidences, but

a closer peek

reveals

the underlying values

and

political

motivations.

Just

as

Andrew

Dessler

and

Edward

Parson

argue

in

The

Science

and

Politics

of

Global

Climate

Change

,

“political

actors

are

rewarded

for

succeeding

in

various

ways

where

one’s

gain

is

another’s

loss,

such

as

gaining

and

2

holding power, enacting policies consistent with their political principles, and delivering

the benefits of governm

ent action to their supporters and constituents”

(Dessler & Parson,

2010).

To

win

the

hardest

job

interview

in

the

world,

candidates

camouflage

their

incentives

with

seemly

concrete

supports,

which

introduces

even

more

difficulties

for

voters to understand the game of throne

. Today we are going to dig into O’Malley’s and

Paul’s statement

s about government regulation on energy, and take on the aspect of their

values, associatedinterest groups and future votersto revel why they adopt their political

positions.

Political

positions

and

one’s

career

path

are

very

often

closely

connected,

so

a

sense

of

the

candidates’

political

background

would

be

rather

beneficial

to

understand

their positons.

Martin O’Malley served as the governor of Maryland from Jan. 2007 to

Jan. 2015

. In recent

ranking, Crowdpac ranked

O’Malley as 6.7L on

a scale of 10L to

10C, making him the second most liberal presidential candidate (Crowdpac, 2015). Rand

Paul is a Republican member of the Senate from Kentucky. Crowdpac ranked Paul as a

10

+

C, making him the most conservative candidate (Crowdpac, 2015).

C

andidates’ positions

on energy regulation reflex their values on the economy and

the environment, inheritedfrom the values of their strongest supporters. Values are views

about

what

is

right

or

wrong.

Judith

Layzer

believes

that

the

cores

of

many

political

debates lay on the difference in values. She argues in

The Environmental Case

, “

Nearly

all environmental policy disputes are,

at heart, contests over values”, and these values are

usua

lly

masked

“in

terms

of

science,

economic

and

risk”

(Judith

Layzer,

2011).

The

urgency of economic growth and the importance of environmental health are two main

conflicting

values

in

today’

s

environmental

one

side

of

the

debate,

Martin

3

O’Malley

advocates a stronger regulation

on natural

gas and fracking, and promises to

adopt

zero- tolerance

policy

for

methane

leaking

(The

Des

Monies

Register,

2016).O’Malley’s

service

as

Maryland

governor

tells

us

the

insight

of

his

position.

Having 3,100 mile of

tidal

shore, Maryland is

one of the states most vulnerable to

the

effect

of

sea

level

rise,

the

consequence

of

global

climate

change.

Experts

estimate

Maryland costal sea level to rise 1-2 feet by mid-century and 2-6 feet by 2100. Facing the

rising

tide,

Maryland

city

planners,

experts

and

social

groups

have

been

calling

for

preparation

for

this

thread

(The

Washington

Post,

2013).

University

of

Maryland

has

been

taking

multiple

measures

to

reduce

carbon

footage

in

campus

(University

of

Maryland,

2009).

Maryland

Senate

recently

passed

a

bill,

with

38

to

8

votes,

to

cut

greenhouse

gas

emissions

to

40 percent

below

2006

levels

by

2030

(The

Washington

Post,

2016).

Such

participations

and

movementsrepresent

Maryland’s

dedication

to

combat

climate

change.

O’Malley

is

in

the

same

front.

During

his

8-year

career

in

Maryland, O’Malley initiated seve

ral

environmental organizations

and engaged himself

in

the

movement.

Running

presidential

campaign,

he

carries

on

these

environmental

values and apply them to broader, national and global issues.

Rand

Paul,

on

the

other

hand,

accuses

EPA

of

over

regulations,

which

as

he

claims

cost

5

percent

of

USGDP

and

increase

unemployment

by

33

percent

(The

Washington

Times,

2011).

As

a

Senator

from

Kentucky,

Paul’s

position

is

closely

connected

to

Kentucky

residents’

values.

Kentucky

is

the

nation’s

most

productive

coalfield,

but

employment

in

the

coal

industry

has

been

in

a

30-year

decline

(Herald

Leader, 2015). Even though this decline is due to many factors including cheap natural

gas,

Kentucky

politician,

industry

executives

and

residents,

especially

in

Eastern

4

Kentucky,

blamed

environmental

safety

regulation and emission limits

(Herald

Leader,

2015).

Rand

Paul

represent

Kentucky’s

best

benefits

in

the

Senate,

and

onpresidential

campaign his positions are hand in hand with the values of the coal-mining communities.

The

policy

he

advocates

would

give

Kentucky

coal

industry

a

boost.

Besides,

Paul’s

hatred of government regulation and favor of economic freedom can be from his father

Ron Paul’s influence. Ron Paul is a former politician, and a critic of federal government’s

regulation

and

participation

in

the

free

market.

He

is

the

first

chairman

of

CSE,

an

organization

that

fight

for

less

government

and

less

regulation.

As

a

free-market

environmentalist,

Ron

Paul

promote

what

John

Locke

considers

as

the

fundamental

function

of

the

government

—

protecting

property

right(The

Atlantic,

2012).

The

father

and

the

son

have

similar

stand

ground

about

environmental

regulations.

Ron

Paul’s

ideology

and

its

influence

partially

explain

why

Rand

Paul

become

an

anti-regulation

advocate.

Presidential

candidates

’

positions

can

also

be

interpreted

as

attempt

to

gain

support from interest groups. Interest groups are non-government organizations that work

to

influence

policy;

interest

groups

express

the

values

of

their

members

(World

Bank,

2013).

Winning

support

from

different

interest

groups

will

give

candidates

invaluable

resources for their campaign, including potential voters, cultural

impact,

people power,

and money.

O’Malley’s and Paul’s ties to interest groups provide another explanation for

their

position

on

energy

regulation.

During

his

career

in

Maryland

and

presidential

campaign,

Martin

O’Malley

has

been

a

perseverant

advocate

for

reducing

carbon

emission

and

adopting

clean

energy

(,

2014).

He

also

signed

Regional

Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to regulate Maryland’s carbon emission. Such efforts