Global Warming Consensus Among the Candidates

Apparently all of the Democrats and some of he Republicans in the race agree that the American people MUST BE PUNISHED!

Hillary Clinton, for example, supports reducing carbon emissions 80% by 2050; imposing a 55 mpg fleet standard for automobiles by 2030; generating 20% of electric power with renewables by 2020; reducing energy use by 10% by 2020; and supports investment in coal power only if it reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 20%. The other major candidates, John Edwards, Chris Dodd, and Barak Obama share similar targets, though there are minor variations seen in their calls for improved vehicle fuel economy. The only significant outlier in the Democratic field is Bill Richardson, who seems to be trying to out-Gore Al Gore, pushing for a 90% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050; a 50% share for renewables by 2040; and a call to ban coal plans outright unless they can capture and store their carbon emissions, a capability that, at present, does not exist.
In stark contrast to the unified Democratic position, the Republican field largely defies easy classification even after significant scrutiny. John McCain, who has long endorsed carbon emission trading, continues to do so, though at a less aggressive level than the Democratic candidates. Two other Republicans – Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee – have expressed general support for the idea of capping carbon emissions, but have not spelled out any method by which they’d achieve such a cap. Rudy Giuliani might also fit into this category, as he has expressed admiration for the Arnold Schwarzenneger approach to environmental policy (which prominently features carbon emission trading) though Giuliani has focused more on conducting another space race, this time focused on developing alternative (presumably lower-carbon) forms of energy.

Let’s make this an issue in the campaign. But we can’t let the politicians gloss over the consequences of their programs. This will have dire effects on our standard of living of ourselves and more importantly our children.
So Hillary and Huck and Bill and Mitt what will this do to the kind of cars we can drive and the kind of houses we’ll be able to build? What will electricity cost us and what are we to do if we use too much of our allocation early in the month.
Sure the politicians claim that they’ll regulate big power, big automobile and bit oil but it comes down to the fact that we’ll be paying the price in our standard of living. It’s the regular folks who will have less choices and pay more for what we do get.
All of this for a theory that can’t even explain why the temperatures haven’t risen in the last eight years.
So let’s make this election about choices the consumer today and tomorrow will face. We’ll put these politicians and their junk science on the ash heap where they belong.