(Host)
As political rhetoric heats up, environmental educator and commentator
Russ Weis considers how presidential politics can have a big impact on
our ever-warming planet.
(Weis) Now that Fall is here, I’m
thinking back to the scorching temperatures that afflicted much of the
nation this past summer – especially our central and western states. And
it’s occurred to me that the term "global warming" shares the initials
of our first president: George Washington.
Like George, I try not
to lie – especially when I teach my students about the climatological
circumstances we find ourselves in these days. And I’m afraid it’s no
accident that the cherry trees in DC bloomed extremely early this year.
So I wish this fact would give pause to anyone who would aspire to the
same lofty position as George Washington once held. However, these days
environmental issues don’t seem to command the serious attention in our
national political discourse that they should.
I was perplexed
when Mitt Romney said at his party’s convention that "President Obama
promised…to heal the planet. My promise is to help…your family." I can’t
see that these two pledges are mutually exclusive. I don’t know about
Romney’s family, but mine lives on this Earth.
I agree more with
statements made by President Obama at the Democratic Convention when he
said "…climate change is not a hoax. More droughts and floods and
wildfires are not a joke. They are a threat to our children’s future."
But if that’s the case, where’s the current action plan for dealing with
it all?
I once taught a course about the 1960s in which I
showed episodes of a popular TV series from a decade ago called
"American Dreams." The show followed a fictional family from
Philadelphia as it negotiated the turmoil of the Kennedy years. One
scene I remember depicted the budding environmentalism of that early
era. In it, the precocious younger daughter of the family timed
everyone’s showers, to make a point about saving water.
In the
‘70s, President Jimmy Carter’s visionary approach to ecological issues
included White House solar panels, and an alternative energy program.
But the next president, Ronald Reagan, had the panels removed, gutted
the energy program and even rolled back automobile fuel efficiency
standards.
In 1984, Reagan ran on the theme "Morning in
America." The slogan implied that we hardworking Americans deserved to
have everything we desired. And as a result, conservation came to be
seen as directly opposing the abundance that fossil fuels provided.
Today presidential candidates should be engaging in the healthy political
exercise of updating our definition of the American Dream, but no dreams
will be reached by anyone unless the planet they live on is itself
healthy. Adopting a shortsighted approach to our current predicament may
lead to the dreams of our children going up in smoke – literally – as
global warming continues to spiral out of control.
Should that
happen, I’m afraid the slogan of future presidential candidates might
sound a lot like Reagan’s – but with a slight twist in the spelling.
Add
a "u" in there and it becomes "Mourning in America" – a lament for the
America that was, and the America that might have been.