Questions for the Candidates (on climate change)

So, here in Iowa, we have a unique opportunity to meet and question the presidential candidates, both Democratic and Republican. So what sort of questions should we be asking? Certainly it is best to begin by introducing yourself (briefly) with something personal and of local concern, and to try to connect (if you at all can) to the candidate, the candidate’s values, and the candidate’s message.

Beyond that though, I think the nature of the questions depend on the ideology of the candidate. For people with a real committment to the issue (only Democrats so far), I think the key thing is how they intend to approach the problem, practically and politically. So my questions would be:

1.       Given the current poisonous political environment is Washington DC, how do we do enough soon enough to make avert the worst effects of climate change?

2.       Are you open to small-government, market-based approaches such as the Citizen’s Climate Lobby’s  Fee & Dividend (a tax on carbon emissions that would be fully refunded to the public in the form of an individual tax cut)?

3.       How would you counter big-money corporate interests that want action on climate change to fail?

And my lingering concerns would be that a) we would do something but be satisfied with that, and fail to do enough, or b) that we would do something administratively that a later president would overturn, or c) that we would try to do something but fail because Congress refuses to act.

Small government, market-based approaches are of particular interest to me because they are the most libertarian in principle, because they emphasize the positive (jobs, innovation, and broad-based-action), and—once ingrained into the economy—are more difficult to reverse (far more difficult than executive actions or EPA rules).

For Republicans sympathetic (but not fully committed) to the cause,  try to lock-in the assumption that there is a serious problem (or at least a high risk), then ask what they would do about it from their own ideological perspective, e.g.

1.       Assuming we want to hedge our bets, in case the science is right, what would be the conservative/libertarian approach to dealing with climate change?

2.       Are you open to market-based approaches such as the Citizen’s Climate Lobby’s  Fee & Dividend (a tax on carbon emissions that would be fully refunded to the public in the form of an individual tax cut)?

Where the second question (from my perspective) serves as a test of whether they are serious enough to be specific.

For candidate’s more hostile to the subject, denying that climate change is either real or man-made, I suggest confronting them more directly. If they claim to be  telling it like it is, then how can they be so willing to deny the truth on climate change? Or put up NASA satellites to collect data on the Earth’s climate? Or, if they are not a scientist (and uncertain of the truth), then why they are unwilling to listen to people who are scientists (and know what they claim not to know)? Would they be just as unwilling to listen to the expert advice of military generals in a time of war? Or to economists in a time of economic crisis?

The final word. These are my questions, of course, and this is my approach to dealing with the candidates. (So far I’ve talked to Rand Paul, Chris Christie, Lindsay Graham, and Bernie Sanders).  And I don’t suggest (you not being me) that you do the same thing. But (IMHO) it is by overwhelming the political process with our individual concerns and personal stories that we have the most clout, and not by preaching from the same prayer book.