[Editor's Note: This was originally posted yesterday at 1 pm. However, environmental lobbyist Cliff Traisman's comments weren't added until much later in the day because our Internet went down before we had a chance to add his interview into the piece. We wanted to present the full story again in case readers missed the addition.]
The P-I links a December 11-13 poll today that shows Americans are more concerned (85 percent to 12 percent) with improving the economy than with reducing global warming, even as Copehagen has been front page news. (Of course, the two issues are related in that green technology is a way to retrofit the economy… Not to mention that global environmental collapse will have huge economic implications.)
As a green, I’ve been thinking a lot about this issue lately, particularly in light of Mike McGinn’s campaign and in light of the $2.6 billion deficit (which puts a high alert on health care and education cuts).
Some negative buzz on McGinn during his campaign was that his obsession with environmental issues was “bourgeois” (which is why Joe Mallahan played up his supposed social and economic justice cred. Mallahan was a bit like Hillary Clinton going for the Ohio vote while Barack Obama was getting the arugula vote. Arugula won it in Seattle.)
As I’m making my rounds in prep for the legislative session in Olympia and, in particular, talking to environmental groups, I’m hearing that—despite pretty much getting hosed last session— they’re not going to be doing much to make up ground this year. (For example, no transit oriented development bill—one of last year’s priorities that went down.)
It’s a short session, they say, but more importantly: There’s the budget.
So far, the left’s agenda in Olympia this year seems more blue than green. When a supergroup coalition of lefties (dubbing itself Rebuilding Our Economic Future) showed up in Olympia last week to protest the budget, no environmental groups took the stage with the union members, health care advocates, education leaders, and financial aid students.
At the press conference, the group’s spokesman Sandeep Kaushik kinda poetically said this:
“The budget presented by Governor Gregoire represents a veritable tsunami or heartbreak … It puts at risk the long term economic future of our state and leaves in its wake a level of wreckage that is unprecedented and that will have devastating consequences for the elderly, the poor, the needy, our kids, the environment, and for working families across the state.”
However, that evening, when Rebuilding Our Economic Future put out its official press release, the word “environment” was struck from that quote.
Kaushik tells me that was an accident and the environmental community is part of the coalition that’s working out a platform and message on the budget.
I’m sure they are. But I do wonder if the issue that seemed to be the zeitgeist during the last half of this decade has suddenly been displaced in our state.
Cliff Traisman, lobbyist for the Washington Environmental Council, says environmental programs took a “disproportionate” hit in the budget last year when the Department of Natural Resources was “cut to the bone.” Green advocates will be “more vigilant” this year, he promises.
The question remains: Given the immediate human drama of health care and education cuts—how will they do that?
“Leaders [in Olympia] talk about the green energy sector,” Traisman says, referring to the focus on creating green collar jobs. “Well, that economic strategy is us.”
One of the environmental community’s top bills this session is a fee on petroleum that will raise $240 million a biennium. The money will go to storm water cleanup—a de facto jobs bill.
Raising money is on the table this session according to the governor and Democratic leadership in the house and senate. Armed with the petroleum fee—which is being sponsored by liberal state Sen. Craig Pridemore (D-49) and liberal state Rep. Tim Ormbsy (D-3)— Traisman says, “We will be a strong voice in the revenue discussion.”
The governor’s budget calls for an $81 million cut to toxic clean up funding.
Full disclosure: Kaushik co-founded PubliCola last January. He is involved in our business operations but has no editorial control.
Tweet
The zeitgeist is now people losing jobs, homes, and healthcare. It’s hard for someone who lost a job or who has a kid who’s sick without the funds for medical care to think about much else. See Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which was the zeitgeist of the left back in the 70s and isstill relevant today. The poor and homeless have pretty much been ignored by the environmentalists. Both people and polar bears are dying; our environmental infrastructure is dangerous and/or crumbling, and our safety net’s frayed. We may not be able to help save the polar bears since their environment’s pretty much melting or melted; we can help people stay alive.
Toyota is moving forward on the electric car, and ….
if we don’t get out in front on e cars and other reen technology, we aren’t going to be green or have any jobs worth doing.
Similarly, the clibborn horrorshow finance plan (“STICK IT UP YER ASS SEATTLE, WE DON’T CARE”) for a huge megahighway project that does nothing to actually move many people much of anywhere…..is the kind of economic waste that is also enviro waste.
There are so many overlaps between social justice, economic growth (in a healthy way ) and the environment, take housing for another example, we can’t even seem to agree in Seattle that requiring $40,000 per space underground parking spaces in new multifamily is dumb. It raises the cost by $40,000 and forces people to participate in a car storage system when maybe they want a bike or a scooter, not a Hummer.
“I have a call into the Washington Environmental Council to get a sense of how they plan to navigate the budget session.”
The Washington Environmental Council will navigate this session as it has navigated all previous ones: on hands and knees, groveling, kowtowing, and genuflecting to the governor, the speaker, and anyone else they perceive as important, asking for scraps and compromising to crumbs.
“Tsunami of heartbreak” is POETIC? Hahahahaha choke.
Well, he said “kinda” poetically.
Francis, You missed the poetic part: “veritable”.
transit is another blue green thing.
@3, comment of the year.
Yes, people think the economy is more important than climate change because half of them deny it exists. If you ask them about compromising clean air and water to make a few bucks, you get a much different poll result.
“even as Copehagen has been front page news”
Please copy edit…
Brian: Climate change is real, and so is the dire situation of poor people. Climate change is inevitable and pretty much out of our hands now; the damage is already done. Further economic harm to people (not bank presidents, real people) is not inevitable; we can do something about it, and it should trump environment, at least right now.
Poor people bear the brunt of things like toxic spills and bad air quality as well. There are no easy answers.
Two birds, one stone.
Addressing global warming and creating jobs are the same problem requiring the a single solution: Invest in sustainability, create green collar jobs.
What other economic sector has the potential to create the same number of living wage jobs?
Denmark grew their economy while keeping carbon emissions level. They’ve concluded they’ll have higher growth if they cut emissions. (Being more efficient means being more profitable.)
It’s never been jobs vs environment. Protect the environment, create jobs.
Case in point: PNW timber workers lost their jobs to automation, not the spotted owl.
The effects of global warming on in the future, the poor economy is hurting us now. Of course it is the more important concern. A strong innovative economy is also essential to fighting climate change.
Really though its a dumbass poll.
Green jobs are key to the future, hopefully near future. Sustaining people until we get those jobs is key to the present and the future.
@ 13. Jason Osgood
@ 16. sarah68
Please. The only people getting green jobs are the
financial\banking industries, with oodles of freshly
printed green money from the TARP tree.
When usury is the preferred way for the so-called
economic growth, green jobs is like saying bigfoot or
Sasquatch: everyone knows about it, but hardly anyone
has actually seen one.
Toyota is moving forward on the electric car, and ….
if we don't get out in front on e cars and other reen technology, we aren't going to be green or have any jobs worth doing.
Similarly, the clibborn horrorshow finance plan (“STICK IT UP YER ASS SEATTLE, WE DON'T CARE”) for a huge megahighway project that does nothing to actually move many people much of anywhere…..is the kind of economic waste that is also enviro waste.
There are so many overlaps between social justice, economic growth (in a healthy way ) and the environment, take housing for another example, we can't even seem to agree in Seattle that requiring $40,000 per space underground parking spaces in new multifamily is dumb. It raises the cost by $40,000 and forces people to participate in a car storage system when maybe they want a bike or a scooter, not a Hummer.