It Doesn't Pay to Be a Fossil-Fuel Democrat on Election Day

My new blog at Huffington Post. Cross-posted at Democrats for Progress and DailyKos.

This was a difficult election for Democrats and it was even worse for Democrats still pushing fossil fuels. The Democratic co-chair of the Congressional Coal Caucus lost his seat along with a slew of others who tried to prove they're as pro-coal, pro-oil, and pro-fracking as any Republican. 

There are plenty of examples like Grimes in Kentucky. Or Tennant and Nick Rahall in West Virginia who mimicked conservative talking points on coal in their losing races. Mary Landrieu is expected to lose in a Louisiana run-off. If you can't run on clean energy and climate change in a state that saw Hurricane Katrina and the Gulf oil disaster, then you're an incompetent politician. 

No state made the point more clearly than Illinois, where Democrats serious about climate won reelection while fossil-fuel Democrats lost. Governor Pat Quinn once bragged about passing a bill to launch fracking along with lead Senate sponsor Mike Frerichs. Quinn lost reelection after spending months avoiding the issue (and anti-fracking protesters).

Read the rest here and thanks for sharing.

Congressional candidate Mike Bost says fracking is safe but environmentalists want people to die

Illinois Republican Congressional candidate Mike Bost has some unusual beliefs about environmentalists and fracking. In a recent radio interview, Bost said about environmentalists:

"...if it was up to them, people should die and everything else should exist. Now, I know because I was in the negotiations with them."

Bost was referring to his role negotiating the law that will open Illinois to fracking. Several groups based in Chicago, including Faith-in-Place, NRDC, and the Environmental Law & Policy Center participated in negotiations and supported the law over the objection of environmentalists in areas that will be most impacted.

Now, I wasn't present for negotiations but I've never heard staff for any of those groups suggest anything remotely similar to the opinion that people should die and everything else should exist. In fact, most climate change and anti-fracking activists are involved to save human life.

Many of us noticed that fracking made North Dakota the deadliest state to work in.

We're bothered that fracking operations use chemicals known to cause cancer respiratory problems, birth defects and other health impacts.

We know the massive increase in trucks transporting dangerous chemicals is yet another unavoidable deadly hazard, especially since toxic spills shutting down I-57 in southern Illinois is already a regular story.

Since fracking contributes to climate change we're also working to reduce climate disasters like extreme flooding in southern Illinois.

But Mike Bost is excited about fracking because it will bring tax revenue and jobs. He's willing to sacrifice human life for the sake of transient temp jobs that will mostly go to out-of-state workers for the profit of out-of-state companies. And he has the balls to accuse environmentalists of not caring about human life?

Surprisingly, this is considered a competitive race. Fracking is highly controversial in the district. A poll taken last year showed southern Illinois evenly split on whether fracking should be allowed, with 54% of independents opposed. That's remarkable considering the same poll claims 80% support coal mining. Opposition is growing but there's a conspicuous absence of regional or statewide polls on the topic since then. His support for fracking will cost Bost support among moderates and independents.

Because I'm pretty certain no real-world environmentalist ever expressed to Bost the views he claims, I have to wonder what imaginary tree-huggers he was negotiating with. Do other people see them? Do they always take human form? Does he typically win arguments with his imaginary enemies or lose? Hopefully someone on his staff can help if these mysterious negotiators make more demands.

Congressman Bill Enyart doesn't want help from environmentalists or Obama supporters

I received another fundraising email today from freshman Democratic Congressman Bill Enyart. As it turns out, he doesn't want my money after all. He made that very clear in his public statement promising to fight Obama's climate change agenda.

“As co-chairman of the Congressional Coal Caucus, I will work tirelessly against any proposed new federal mandates that will increase our energy costs, and decimate our Southern Illinois coal industry in the process. 

Do you know what actually caused a large electric rate increase in his district? The new Prairie State coal plant. New coal costs more than wind power. What's hurting the economy in his district lately? Record drought, extreme flooding, and not being able to move barge traffic along the Mississippi.

I understand the politics of Enyart's district in southern Illinois coal country. I also know that, despite the coal industry's dominance over local press and politicians, there are many voters who understand why relying on a coal economy keeps southern Illinois poor, just like West Virginia and eastern Kentucky. No region is going to prosper by waiting for the mines to re-open. Southern Illinois deserves a Congressman with the courage to help build a new energy economy instead of selling the empty promise of coal.

Clearly, Enyart believes the coal industry is more important to his re-election effort than environmentalists and Obama supporters. He doesn't need our donations or volunteer efforts. I'm going to reply to his fundraising email by letting him know that he should direct it to coal industry executives and hope they pull through for him.

If someone isn't willing to tackle a problem that threatens the homes, jobs and lives of millions of people then I don't understand why they're in public office. Organizing for America has been targeting Republicans who won't take action on climate change. But, it was fossil fuel Democrats who stopped the cap-and-trade bill from getting a vote in the Senate. This problem will be solved when Democrats are forced to accept that they can oppose action on climate change or they can get re-elected. But they can't do both.

Illinois drought and flooding isn't climate change. It's a Climate Clusterfuck.

Remember the stories about rivers in Illinois earlier this year? They were about a long drought so bad it was slowing barge traffic on the Mississippi River down to a halt.

And here we are in spring with our rivers and half the state flooded. In fact, heavy flooding forced the closure of about a dozen locks on the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers. Sections of both rivers have been closed to barge traffic.

I just took the train from Chicago to Springfield and I saw all kinds of water in places where it isn't supposed to be. It's bad.

(Photo Credit: Chris Young)

In the Quad Cities, WQAD TV news has a story about drought and flooding hitting a Christmas tree farm along the Rock River. Drought had killed 900 trees when they first covered the farm in July. Now, he has to visit his trees in a boat. He says he has never seen it go from one extreme to another this badly before.



As usual, almost no one in the press is pointing it out, but this is exactly what those nagging scientists told us would happen. They warned the Midwest would have more erratic, extreme and unpredictable weather, including more droughts, and more severe storms leading to flooding. A federal report on the impacts of climate change in the Midwest summarized:

The likely increase in precipitation in winter and spring, more heavy downpours, and greater evaporation in summer would lead to more periods of both floods and water deficits.

The 2009 report even warned that low river levels would cause problems for river traffic. It's like they could see into the future. That report was either written by clairvoyant fortune tellers, or a group of scientists who really knew what the hell they were talking about.

So yes, we get both more flooding and more droughts thanks to climate change. Barge traffic is interrupted in both winter and spring.

At this point it's more descriptive to go ahead and call it a Climate Clusterfuck. That's what we're dealing with from here on out.

More attention is given to the threat of rising sea levels on the coats, but the Mississippi River Valley is already being hit hard in ways that harm our regional economy, food supply, and safety. No one can say exactly what the weather would have looked like this year if climate change wasn't happening, but we do know that if we really want more seasons like this and worse, then we should keep burning fossil fuels.

That reminds me of two downstate Illinois Congressmen who see this problem and think we should keep promoting a major cause: coal. Freshmen Representatives Rodney Davis and Bill Enyart held a joint press conference promoting a bill giving the Corps of Engineers more power to keep barge traffic flowing down the Mississippi River.

Yet, Enyart also joined with Davis' mentor, BFF, and fellow coal lover John Shimkus, to form the Congressional Coal Caucus. In their joint statement both said their goal is to create jobs by promoting coal.

Jobs are good. But, when discussing rivers, both Enyart and Davis said keeping barge traffic moving is essential to the regional economy. Whether they realize it or not, they admitted that burning coal is harming the regional economy and costing us jobs due to the impacts of climate change on river traffic.

This is short term thinking. They're introducing a bill to deal with one immediate impact of climate change while simultaneously fighting to expand the industry that contributes most to the problem. Fighting for coal means each year climate change will do more damage to Illinois crops, rivers, cities, and our economy.

Politicians like to make everyone happy, but they have to make a choice. They can either continue to be servants of the coal industry, or they can serve every other industry and citizen in Illinois. They can no longer do both because climate change is the overwhelming threat to us all.