Observing Climate Change

This week, four U.S. Senators - John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Lindsey Graham and Susan Collins - are touring northern Canada and Alaska to study already-observed consequences of global climate change. No major (or minor) U.S. news outlets have covered the trip yet, but the Whitehorse Daily Star from the Yukon Territory ran an article yesterday on the group's stop in the Yukon before they headed on to Alaska.

While in Canada, the senatorial quartet met with government officials, took an aerial tour of the Alligator ice patch (where recent melting has exposed long-hidden artifacts and other materials), observed regions of forest attacked by the invasive spruce bark beetle (which has damaged 400,000 hectares of timber-land after a population explosion fostered by warmer temps), and met with village elders in the native settlement of Klukshu to discuss their first-hand experiences with climate change. They will conduct similar meetings and tours in Alaska.

Some quotes from a press briefing the senators held in Whitehorse on Tuesday:

- Clinton: Asked how to bring the effects of global climate change to the American people, she said "For most people, it’s those human stories. It’s the impacts on the lives of those human beings that they want to hear about. ... We’re trying to stress the importance of our country, not just our government, but our people of recognizing the challenges. Canada is not very far away from where we live. It might be a little bit easier to grasp some of the changes that are happening right here on our continent."

- Graham: "It’s one thing to look at it from an academic point of view and say on the one hand this on the other hand that. It’s another thing to have people talk to you who have been up here for hundreds and sometimes thousands of years to tell you that their life has changed and it’s changing for the worse. The reality of the problem has been made clear to me through this experience."

The senators agreed that global climate change should not be a partisan issue. McCain said "There are still members of the administration and the Congress that are convinced it’s all a myth. How you rationalize that argument, I cannot explain," and Clinton added "It’s not about ideology. It’s about science and facts and evidence. More and more people regardless of their political background are saying this is a problem we have to address."

While lauding the non-binding resolution passed in the Senate during the energy bill debate (which was of course not accepted by the House in conference and consequently disappeared completely) that 'recognized the existence' of climate change, McCain said the question now is not over whether the problem exists, but "how late it is when we decide to act. The damage is being inflicted as we speak. This is the miner’s canary of the globe. How serious the damages will be and how much it’s going to take to repair it? That’s the tragedy of this."

What's to be done? Ay, there's the rub. Graham is correct in saying "We live in a global economy, as well as a global environment," making the argument that whatever steps are taken internationally, they must include developing nations. "Without China or India being involved, I think we are going backwards. I think we need a comprehensive approach. Not just the United States and Canada, but the whole world dealing with this problem in a way that we can afford." Collins suggested that the world agree to a successor plan for Kyoto which would include such nations as China and India, a step which would certainly be a healthy one.

Of course I (and three of the four senators, with the exception of Graham) favor strong unilateral action as well as international cooperation in the form of the McCain-Lieberman emissions control legislation. But the two are not incompatible, and I give Graham credit for taking this trip and making himself aware of the issue and its effects. Both interational and domestic steps are necessary to combat the climate change problem, and that realization seems to be becoming clearer with each passing year.

I have been critical of some congressional trips in the past - particularly those paid for by lobbyists which involve the House Majority Leader golfing at St. Andrews and other fluffy junkets. The trip taken by these four senators, and the many other actual research and observation tours undertaken by members of Congress, fall on the "worthwhile" end of the scale. It is important that our elected leaders get the opportunity to leave Washington and see the consequences of their actions (or non-actions) first-hand. I only wish that the senators had somehow wrestled a few of their more skeptical colleagues onto the plane with them.

Hopefully the American press will cover the Alaska leg of the tour in a bit more detail ... I'll write about the senators' visit there once I get some updates on it.