Overview
Convene a group of political scientists, elected officials (and their staffers), and campaign operatives to conduct an analysis and dialogue about the connections between systemic problems in democratic governance in the United States and climate change. For example, how do campaign financing, redistricting and the lack of competitive seats and other factors influence policy performance on climate change?
Participants | Objectives | Related InitiativesÂ
Participants
Yarrow Axford
David Burwell
Thea Hayes
Kris Holstrom
Andrew Huemmler
Clayt Lauter
John McQuaid
Bill Shore
Bill Yeates
Objectives
- Study the fundamentals. Some systemic issues, like redistricting to create non-competitive congressional seats, are often recognized as serious by the public but are not connected specifically to issues such as climate change. A vigorous and detailed analysis of these connections could illuminate the basis for gridlock on climate change and point the way toward new strategies. For example, a seat-by-seat analysis that evaluates both degree of competitiveness (swing district or safe seat) and elected officials’ positions on climate change could reveal important patterns.
Related Initiatives
- Pew Center on Global Climate Change - The Pew Center on Global Climate Change brings together business leaders, policy makers, scientists, and other experts to bring a new approach to a complex and often controversial issue. Our approach is based on sound science, straight talk, and a belief that we can work together to protect the climate while sustaining economic growth.
2 comments
April 6th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
Richard Jordan
Should really look at newly elected officials — e.g., Eliot Spitzer, Gov. of NY, has nominated former 30-year Assemblyman Pete Grannis to be State Dept. of Env. Conservation head.
What about having across colleges — meaning a multi-college university project, such a discussion funded by the Lily Endowment??
They seem to be a likely source of interest.
Richard Jordan
January 9th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Evan
While I agree that many democratic reforms (e.g. proportional representation, public financing of elections, etc.) could enable political leaders in the U.S. to be less beholden to the fossil fuel industry, I do not believe that we have the time to make these reforms as a precursor to enacting climate policies. Our current system is far from perfect, but it’s what we have and I would recommend we focus our democratic process efforts on supplementing the existing institutions with processes that change the balance of power of interest groups outside of them. This includes enabling citizens to be better organized and yield greater pressure on their representatives. This also includes organizing a coalition of influential wealthy interests (e.g. US-CAP) that work to overcome fossil fuel capture of the political process. In some ways, this is a call to instigate a civil war within US industries. Much like northern US businesses had a financial incentive to support the abolition of slavery, so too do many major US businesses (see the US-CAP members) have an incentive to support energy efficiency, clean energy technology development, etc.