2016 presidential candidates on energy and environmental policy

* 2020 Candidates
* Timeline of presidential announcements
* 2016 Pres. Election
* Candidates
* General election candidates
* Republicans
* Donald Trump
* Democrats
* Hillary Clinton
* Third Party
* Gary Johnson
* Jill Stein
* 2016 vice presidential candidates
* Possible vice presidential picks
* Withdrawn candidates
* Democrats
* Lincoln Chafee
* Lawrence Lessig
* Martin O'Malley
* Bernie Sanders
* Jim Webb
* Republicans
* Jeb Bush
* Ben Carson
* Chris Christie
* Ted Cruz
* Carly Fiorina
* Jim Gilmore
* Lindsey Graham
* Mike Huckabee
* Bobby Jindal
* John Kasich
* George Pataki
* Rand Paul
* Rick Perry
* Marco Rubio
* Rick Santorum
* Scott Walker
* POTUS
* Barack Obama
* Former presidents
* George W. Bush
* Bill Clinton
* George H.W. Bush
* Ronald Reagan
* Jimmy Carter
* Presidential debates (2015-2016)
* Ballot access for presidential candidates
* Important campaign dates
* Delegate rules
* Polling
* Presidential campaign fundraising, 2008-2016
* Ratings and scorecards
* Straw polling
* Democratic National Convention, 2016
* Republican National Convention, 2016
* Analysis
* Media narratives
* The media's coverage of Donald Trump
* The media's coverage of Hillary Clinton
* Post-debate analysis
* Democrats
* April 14, 2016 (CNN)
* March 9, 2016 (Univision)
* March 6, 2016 (CNN)
* February 11, 2016 (PBS)
* February 4, 2016 (MSNBC)
* January 17, 2016 (NBC)
* December 19, 2015 (ABC)
* November 14, 2015 (CBS)
* October 13, 2015 (CNN)
* Republicans
* March 10, 2016 (CNN)
* March 3, 2016 (FNC)
* February 25, 2016 (CNN)
* February 13, 2016 (CBS)
* February 6, 2016 (ABC)
* January 28, 2016 (FNC)
* January 14, 2016 (FBN)
* December 15, 2015 (CNN)
* November 10, 2015 (FBN)
* October 28, 2015 (CNBC)
* September 16, 2015 (CNN)
* Insiders Polls
* Full Insiders coverage
* September: Democratic control of the White House
* September: Democratic control of Congress
* January: Democratic
* January: Republican
* December: Democratic
* December: Republican
* Insiders Poll: First Democratic debate (October 13, 2015)
* September: Democratic
* September: Republican
* Insiders Poll: Winners and losers from the Fox News Republican Debate
* Post-debate commentary
* CNN Democratic debate: analysis and commentary
* CNN Republican debate: analysis and commentary
* Post-debate analysis: James A. Barnes, Karlyn Bowman and David Kusnet
* Issues
* Domestic affairs
* Current events
* Black Lives Matter movement
* DACA and DAPA
* Defunding Planned Parenthood
* Marriage equality
* RFRA
* Scalia and Supreme Court vacancy
* U.S. Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland
* Transgender restroom access
* Zika virus
* Abortion
* Branches of government
* Civil liberties
* Climate change
* Constitution
* Crime and justice
* Education
* Energy and environmental policy
* Epidemic control
* Federal assistance programs
* Gun control
* Healthcare
* Immigration
* Infrastructure
* LGBTQ rights
* Marijuana
* Puerto Rico
* Rural policy
* Stop-and-frisk policing
* Urban policy
* Economic affairs and government regulations
* Agriculture and food policy
* Budgets
* Government regulations
* Labor and employment
* Trade
* Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal
* Taxes
* Wall Street and banking policy
* Foreign affairs and national security
* Cuba
* Foreign affairs
* Iran nuclear deal
* ISIS and terrorism
* Military and veterans
* National security
* North Korea
* Russia
* Syrian refugees
* Technology, privacy, and cybersecurity
* Political savvy
* Political and leadership attributes
* Campaign preparations
* Power Players
* Super PACs
* Presidential campaign key staff and advisors
* Staff changes
* Polls
* BP battleground poll
* Polls
* Conventions & delegates
* Delegates
* Republican National Convention, 2016
* Republican delegates by state, 2016
* Rule 40 and its impact on the 2016 Republican National Convention
* Republican National Committee
* Democratic National Convention, 2016
* Democratic National Committee

2016 Presidential Election
Date: November 8, 2016

* * *

Candidates
Winner: Donald Trump (R)
Hillary Clinton (D) • Jill Stein (G) • Gary Johnson (L) • Vice presidential candidates

* * *

Election coverage
Important dates • Nominating process • Ballotpedia's 2016 Battleground Poll • Polls • Debates • Presidential election by state • Ratings and scorecards

* * *

Ballotpedia's presidential election coverage
2028 • 2024 • 2020 • 2016

* * *

Have you subscribed yet?

Join the hundreds of thousands of readers trusting Ballotpedia to keep them up to date with the latest political news. Sign up for the Daily Brew.
Click here to learn more.

## Contents

* 1 Democratic ticket
* 1.1 Hillary Clinton
* 1.1.1 Energy development
* 1.1.2 Climate change
* 1.1.3 Keystone XL Pipeline
* 1.1.4 Fracking
* 1.1.5 Environmental conservation
* 1.2 Tim Kaine
* 2 Republican ticket
* 2.1 Donald Trump
* 2.1.1 Climate change
* 2.1.2 Fracking
* 2.1.3 Keystone XL Pipeline
* 2.2 Mike Pence
* 2.2.1 Energy production
* 2.2.2 Energy consumption
* 2.2.3 Cap and trade
* 2.2.4 Environmental Protection Agency
* 3 Green ticket
* 3.1 Jill Stein
* 3.1.1 Climate change
* 3.1.2 Fracking
* 3.2 Ajamu Baraka
* 4 Libertarian ticket
* 4.1 Gary Johnson
* 4.1.1 Climate change
* 4.1.2 Fracking
* 4.2 Bill Weld
* 5 Withdrawn candidates
* 6 Recent news
* 7 See also
* 8 External links
* 9 Footnotes

See below what the 2016 candidates and their respective party platforms said about energy and environmental policy.

OVERVIEW OF CANDIDATE POSITIONS

* Hillary Clinton pledged to power at least half of the nation's energy needs with renewable sources by 2030 and supported investment in clean renewable energy over fracking. She supported the Paris Agreement to combat climate change and opposed the Keystone XL pipeline and drilling in the Arctic.
* Donald Trump supported rescinding the Climate Action Plan and Waters of the U.S. rule, renewing the Keystone XL Pipeline project, canceling the Paris Climate Agreement, and reforming the regulatory environment. Trump claimed that global warming was a “hoax.”
* Jill Stein strongly advocated for a green economy and described climate change as an "all-out climate emergency." Stein also called for federal investment in water infrastructure.
* Gary Johnson said that the federal government should leave energy development to the marketplace. He also supported environmental regulations that protect Americans from polluters. Johnson said he believes that humans are the cause of climate change, but nonetheless opposed caps on carbon emissions.

## Democratic ticket[edit]

###  Hillary Clinton[edit]

##### Energy development[edit]

* In a December 17, 2015, radio interview with South Carolina radio station WGCV-AM, Hillary Clinton said, “I am very skeptical about the need or desire for us to pursue offshore drilling off the coast of South Carolina, and frankly off the coast of other southeast states.”[1]

##### Climate change[edit]

* Politico reported on August 11, 2016, that Hillary Clinton had assembled an advisory team on climate change of more than 100 people, including former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol Browner, former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D), and many former Obama administration officials.[2]

* According to The Hill, “Clinton is open to working with lawmakers on a tax on carbon dioxide emissions if Congress wants it.” On July 26, 2016, Clinton’s energy advisor Trevor Houser said, “Democrats believe that climate change is too important to wait for climate deniers in Congress to start listening to science. And while it’s always important to remain open to a conversation about how to address this issue with Congress, we need a plan that we can implement day one, because it’s too important to wait, and we need to focus on those things as well.”[3]

* Clinton, on January 18, 2016, signed a pledge to power at least half of the nation's energy needs with renewable sources by 2030. The pledge was created by NextGen Climate, a San Francisco-based environmental advocacy organization that was founded by philanthropist, environmental activist, and Democratic donor Tom Steyer in 2013. The group is affiliated with NextGen Climate Action, a super PAC.[4]

* In response to the Paris Agreement adopted on December 12, 2015, Clinton released the following statement, in part: “I applaud President Obama, Secretary Kerry and our negotiating team for helping deliver a new, ambitious international climate agreement in Paris. This is an historic step forward in meeting one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century—the global crisis of climate change. … We cannot afford to be slowed by the climate skeptics or deterred by the defeatists who doubt America’s ability to meet this challenge.”[5]

* Clinton’s campaign announced on November 11, 2015, a $30 billion plan to benefit coal communities as the nation’s electric grid shifts to cleaner energy sources, Time reported. Clinton’s plan would invest in building roads, bridges, water systems, and airports in Appalachia and other coal areas, expand broadband access, and increase public investment in research and development. She would expand a public works project, according to a campaign white paper, aimed at producing clean energy through hydro power on federal lands. The plan said that as president, Clinton would find ways to replace local revenue for public schools lost when coal production facilities disappear, ensuring that workers at bankrupt coal companies keep their benefits. She would also award grants for efficient housing upgrades and community health centers in coal communities.[6]

* Clinton announced her climate change policy on July 26, 2015. She focused on two national goals: installing more than 500 million solar panels across the country by the end of her first term and generating enough renewable energy to power every home in 10 years. In a video released by her campaign promoting her plan, Clinton said, "It's hard to believe there are people running for president who still refuse to accept the settled science of climate change."[7][8]
* After Clinton released part of her climate change policy, the Republican opposition research organization America Rising criticized her for using a private jet. On July 28, 2015, an aide to Clinton announced that her campaign would be carbon neutral. "We'll be offsetting the carbon footprint of the campaign and that includes travel," the aide said. Clinton previously pledged to run a carbon neutral campaign in 2008.[9]

* In December 2014, Clinton said, “The science of climate change is unforgiving, no matter what the deniers may say, sea levels are rising, ice caps are melting, storms, droughts and wildfires are wreaking havoc.”[10]

##### Keystone XL Pipeline[edit]

* Hillary Clinton announced on September 22, 2015, that she opposed the Keystone XL pipeline. “I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone pipeline as what I believe it is -- a distraction from important work we have to do on climate change,” Clinton said. She continued, “And unfortunately from my perspective, one that interferes with our ability to move forward with all the other issues. Therefore I oppose it.”[11][12]

* Clinton declined to take a position on the Keystone XL pipeline on July 27, 2015, citing her involvement in evaluating the project. “No other presidential candidate was secretary of state when this process started, and I put together a very thorough deliberative evidence-based process to evaluate the environmental impact and other considerations of Keystone. As such, I know there is a very careful evaluation continuing and that the final decision is pending to be made by Secretary Kerry and President Obama. Very simply, the evaluation determines whether this pipeline is in our nation’s interest and I’m confident that the pipeline impacts on global greenhouse gas emissions will be a major factor in that decisions, as the president has said. So I will refrain from commenting because I had a leading role in getting that process started and I think we have to let it run its course,” Clinton said.[13]

##### Fracking[edit]

* During the ninth Democratic debate held in Brooklyn, New York, on April 14, 2016, Hillary Clinton was asked whether she had changed her opinion on fracking. Clinton responded, “No, well, I don’t think I’ve changed my view on what we need to do to go from where we are, where the world is heavily dependent on coal and oil, but principally coal, to where we need to be, which is clean renewable energy, and one of the bridge fuels is natural gas. And so for both economic and environmental and strategic reasons, it was American policy to try to help countries get out from under the constant use of coal, building coal plants all the time, also to get out from under, especially if they were in Europe, the pressure from Russia, which has been incredibly intense. So we did say natural gas is a bridge. We want to cross that bridge as quickly as possible, because in order to deal with climate change, we have got to move as rapidly as we can. That’s why I’ve set big goals. I want to see us deploy a half a billion more solar panels by the end of my first term and enough clean energy to provide electricity to every home in America within 10 years. So I have big, bold goals, but I know in order to get from where we are, where the world is still burning way too much coal, where the world is still too intimidated by countries and providers like Russia, we have got to make a very firm but decisive move in the direction of clean energy.”[14]

* At the seventh Democratic debate on March 6, 2016, Clinton discussed her stance on fracking. She said, “You know, I don’t support it when any locality or any state is against it, number one. I don’t support it when the release of methane or contamination of water is present. I don’t support it — number three — unless we can require that anybody who fracks has to tell us exactly what chemicals they are using. So by the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place. And I think that’s the best approach, because right now, there places where fracking is going on that are not sufficiently regulated. So first, we’ve got to regulate everything that is currently underway, and we have to have a system in place that prevents further fracking unless conditions like the ones that I just mentioned are met.”[15]

* Clinton tweeted on August 18, 2015, her disapproval of Shell being permitted to explore the Arctic for oil. “The Arctic is a unique treasure. Given what we know, it's not worth the risk of drilling,” she wrote.[16]

* At the National Clean Energy Summit, Clinton spoke about the benefits of natural gas and the possibility of exporting it. She also expressed concerns about methane leaks and the need to regulate fracking.[17]

##### Environmental conservation[edit]

* Clinton voted for S 22 - Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, which sought to designate certain areas as federally protected land.[18]

* In 2003, Clinton voted for an amendment which sought to prevent "consideration of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge."[19]

* Read more of Hillary Clinton's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

The 2016 Democratic Party Platform on energy and environmental policy

| “  | Combat Climate Change, Build a Clean Energy Economy, and Secure Environmental Justice

Climate change is an urgent threat and a defining challenge of our time. Fifteen of the 16 hottest years on record have occurred this century. While Donald Trump has called climate change a “hoax,” 2016 is on track to break global temperature records once more. Cities from Miami to Baltimore are already threatened by rising seas. California and the West have suffered years of brutal drought. Alaska has been scorched by wildfire. New York has been battered by superstorms, and Texas swamped by flash floods. The best science tells us that without ambitious, immediate action across our economy to cut carbon pollution and other greenhouse gases, all of these impacts will be far worse in the future. We cannot leave our children a planet that has been profoundly damaged.

Democrats share a deep commitment to tackling the climate challenge; creating millions of good-paying middle class jobs; reducing greenhouse gas emissions more than 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050; and meeting the pledge President Obama put forward in the landmark Paris Agreement, which aims to keep global temperature increases to “well below” two degrees Celsius and to pursue efforts to limit global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Celsius. We believe America must be running entirely on clean energy by mid-century. We will take bold steps to slash carbon pollution and protect clean air at home, lead the fight against climate change around the world, ensure no Americans are left out or left behind as we accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy, and be responsible stewards of our natural resources and our public lands and waters. Democrats reject the notion that we have to choose between protecting our planet and creating good-paying jobs. We can and we will do both.

Building a Clean Energy Economy

We are committed to getting 50 percent of our electricity from clean energy sources within a decade, with half a billion solar panels installed within four years and enough renewable energy to power every home in the country. We will cut energy waste in American homes, schools, hospitals, and offices through energy efficient improvements; modernize our electric grid; and make American manufacturing the cleanest and most efficient in the world. These efforts will create millions of new jobs and save families and businesses money on their monthly energy bills. We will transform American transportation by reducing oil consumption through cleaner fuels, vehicle electrification increasing the fuel efficiency of cars, boilers, ships, and trucks. We will make new investments in public transportation and build bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure across our urban and suburban areas. Democrats believe the tax code must reflect our commitment to a clean energy future by eliminating special tax breaks and subsidies for fossil fuel companies as well as defending and extending tax incentives for energy efficiency and clean energy.

Democrats believe that carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases should be priced to reflect their negative externalities, and to accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy and help meet our climate goals. Democrats believe that climate change is too important to wait for climate deniers and defeatists in Congress to start listening to science, and support using every tool available to reduce emissions now. Democrats are committed to defending, implementing, and extending smart pollution and efficiency standards, including the Clean Power Plan, fuel economy standards for automobiles and heavy-duty vehicles, building codes and appliance standards. We are also committed to expanding clean energy research and development.

Democrats recognize the importance of climate leadership at the local level and know that achieving our national clean energy goals requires an active partnership with states, cities, and rural communities where so much of our country’s energy policy is made. We will ensure that those taking the lead on clean energy and energy efficiency have the tools and resources they need to succeed. The federal government should lead by example, which is why we support taking steps to power the government with 100 percent clean electricity. Democrats are committed to closing the Halliburton loophole that stripped the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of its ability to regulate hydraulic fracturing, and ensuring tough safeguards are in place, including Safe Drinking Water Act provisions, to protect local water supplies. We believe hydraulic fracturing should not take place where states and local communities oppose it. We will reduce methane emissions from all oil and gas production and transportation by at least 40 to 45 percent below 2005 levels by 2025 through common-sense standards for both new and existing sources and by repairing and replacing thousands of miles of leaky pipes. This will both protect our climate and create thousands of good-paying jobs. We will work to expand access to cost-saving renewable energy by low-income households, create good-paying jobs in communities that have struggled with energy poverty, and oppose efforts by utilities to limit consumer choice or slow clean energy deployment. We will streamline federal permitting to accelerate the construction of new transmission lines to get low-cost renewable energy to market, and incentivize wind, solar, and other renewable energy over the development of new natural gas power plants.

We support President Obama's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline. As we continue working to reduce carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gas emissions, we must ensure federal actions do not “significantly exacerbate” global warming. We support a comprehensive approach that ensures all federal decisions going forward contribute to solving, not significantly exacerbating, climate change.

Democrats believe that our commitment to meeting the climate challenge must also be reflected in the infrastructure investments we make. We need to make our existing infrastructure safer and cleaner and build the new infrastructure necessary to power our clean energy future. To create good-paying middle class jobs that cannot be outsourced, Democrats support high labor standards in clean energy infrastructure and the right to form or join a union, whether in renewable power or advanced vehicle manufacturing. During the clean energy transition, we will ensure landowners, communities of color, and tribal nations are at the table.

Securing Environmental and Climate Justice

Democrats believe clean air and clean water are basic rights of all Americans. Yet as we saw in Flint, Michigan, low-income communities and communities of color are disproportionately home to environmental justice “hot spots,” where air pollution, water pollution, and toxic hazards like lead increase health and economic hardship. The impacts of climate change will also disproportionately affect low-income and minority communities, tribal nations, and Alaska Native villages—all of which suffer the worst losses during extreme weather and have the fewest resources to prepare. Simply put, this is environmental racism.

Democrats believe we must make it a national priority to eradicate lead poisoning, which disproportionately impacts low-income children and children of color and can lead to lifelong health and educational challenges. We will prioritize hiring and training workers from affected communities to clean up toxic brownfields and expand clean energy, energy efficiency, and resilient infrastructure.

The fight against climate change must not leave any community out or behind—including the coal communities who kept America’s lights on for generations. Democrats will fight to make sure these workers and their families get the benefits they have earned and the respect they deserve, and we will make new investments in energy-producing communities to help create jobs and build a brighter and more resilient economic future. We will also oppose threats to the public health of these communities from harmful and dangerous extraction practices, like mountaintop removal mining operations.

All corporations owe it to their shareholders to fully analyze and disclose the risks they face, including climate risk. Those who fail to do so should be held accountable. Democrats also respectfully request the Department of Justice to investigate allegations of corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies accused of misleading shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change.

Protecting Our Public Lands and Waters

Democrats believe in the conservation and collaborative stewardship of our shared natural heritage: the public lands and waterways, the oceans, Everglades, Great Lakes, the Arctic, and all that makes America’s great outdoors priceless. As a nation, we need policies and investments that will keep America’s public lands public, strengthen protections for our natural and cultural resources, increase access to parks and public lands for all Americans, protect native species and wildlife, and harness the immense economic and social potential of our public lands and waters. Democrats will work to establish an American Parks Trust Fund to help expand local, state, and national recreational opportunities, rehabilitate existing parks, and enhance America's great outdoors—from our forests and coasts to neighborhood parks—so “America’s Best Idea” is held in trust for future generations, and all Americans can access and enjoy natural spaces. Democrats are committed to doubling the size of the outdoor economy, creating nearly hundreds of billions of dollars in new economic activity and millions of new jobs.

Democrats will approach conservation of our public lands and waters in a way that reflects the diversity of our country, by actively engaging all Americans in the great outdoors and protecting natural landscapes and cultural sites that tell the story of America's complex history. To help meet these goals, we will work to build a diverse workforce in agencies that manage America's public lands, waters, and cultural sites.

We oppose drilling in the Arctic and off the Atlantic coast, and believe we need to reform fossil fuel leasing on public lands. We will phase down extraction of fossil fuels from our public lands, starting with the most polluting sources, while making our public lands and waters engines of the clean energy economy and creating jobs across the country. Democrats will work to expand the amount of renewable energy production on federal lands and waters, from wind in Wyoming to solar in Nevada.

Democrats oppose efforts to undermine the effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act to protect threatened and endangered species.

Because the Bristol Bay drainages of Alaska produce the world’s largest salmon fisheries, we support efforts by the EPA under the Clean Water Act to establish proactively science-based restrictions on discharges of dredged or fill material associated with a potential Pebble mine and urge that such restrictions must apply to potential mines at other metallic sulfide deposits in those drainages.

Agricultural lands account for nearly half of the total land area in America and our agricultural practices have a significant impact on our water, land, oceans, and the climate. Therefore, we believe that in order to be effective in keeping our air and water clean and combating climate change, we must enlist farmers as partners in promoting conservation and stewardship.[20]

| ”

|
|

—2016 Democratic Party Platform[21]

###  Tim Kaine[edit]

* After Hillary Clinton announced that Tim Kaine would be her running mate in July 2016, Trip Pollard, a Richmond-based lawyer with the Southern Environmental Law Center, told Scientific American, "In terms of the broader environmental track record, both as governor and senator, I do think 'moderate' is an accurate label." Pollard also said, "[F]or a Southern Democrat in a state where most lawmakers still won't utter the words 'climate change,' Kaine could be considered moderate to progressive."[22]

* Kaine received a 91 percent lifetime pro-environment voting score from the League of Conservation Voters. Politico also reported that Kaine had a reputation as a moderate on environmental policy.[23][24]

* In 2013, Kaine applauded the Obama administration for upgrading national fuel economy standards.[25]

* Kaine was an early opponent of the Keystone XL Pipeline. In a June 20, 2013, Washington Post op-ed, Kaine explained that he was generally pro-pipeline, but opposed Keystone over his concern about using tar sands oil. He wrote, "By most accounts, oil from tar sands is 15 to 20 percent dirtier than conventional petroleum, and the process of extracting and refining it is more difficult and resource-intensive. With so many cleaner alternatives, there is no reason to embrace the use of a dirtier fuel source. Approving the pipeline would send a clear signal to the markets to expand the development of tar sands oil. Such an expansion would hurt our nation’s work to reduce carbon emissions. We have to make energy cleaner tomorrow than it is today. That’s why the president should block Keystone." Kaine asked, "Why would we embrace a dirtier energy source when smart innovation and policy are opening up so many cleaner alternatives?"[25]

* In his 2013 op-ed, Kaine also backed a phased approach to reducing carbon emissions without fully abandoning carbon-based energy. While governor of Virginia, he supported building a modern coal plant over converting a pre-Clean Air Act coal plant to natural gas. Kaine supported offshore drilling and energy production in the Atlantic and increasing natural gas production by using new hydro-fracturing techniques.[25]

* Read more of Tim Kaine's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

## Republican ticket[edit]

###  Donald Trump[edit]

* In a speech in Pennsylvania on September 22, 2016, Trump outlined his energy policies. “I’m going to lift the restrictions on American energy and allow this wealth to pour into our communities including right here in the state of Pennsylvania. We will end the war on coal and on miners,” said Trump to attendees of the 2016 Shale Insight Conference, a gathering of natural gas producers. He said, “Billions of dollars in private infrastructure investment have been lost to the Obama-Clinton restriction agenda. … We will streamline the permitting process for all energy infrastructure projects, including the billions of dollars in projects held up by President Obama -– creating countless more jobs in the process.” Trump further outlined that he would roll back Obama's climate change plans, promote oil and gas drilling on federal lands, and promote the construction of oil and gas pipelines.[26]

* During a rally in Fresno, California, on May 27, 2016, Donald Trump said that there was no drought in the state and that officials were prioritizing an endangered fish, the Delta smelt, with its water restrictions. “We’re going to solve your water problem. You have a water problem that is so insane. It is so ridiculous where they’re taking the water and shoving it out to sea,” he said.[27]

* Donald Trump's campaign asked U.S. Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) to draft a white paper on energy policy. The Huffington Post reported on May 13, 2016, that Cramer “would emphasize the dangers of foreign ownership of U.S. energy assets, burdensome taxes, and over-regulation” in his policy paper.[28]

* On August 24, 2012, Trump tweeted that wind turbines were "an environmental & aesthetic disaster."[29]

* Trump wrote in his 2011 book, Time to Get Tough, that the Marcellus Shale was "one of the largest mother lodes of natural gas" and should be used to buy "more time to innovate and develop newer, more efficient, cleaner, and cheaper forms of energy."[30]

* In a 2011 interview on energy production, Trump said the United States was not yet effectively utilizing nuclear energy, natural gas, or drilling.[31]

##### Climate change[edit]

* The Trump campaign released a statement on the Paris Climate Accord after it was announced on October 5, 2016, that the international climate change deal would go into effect on November 4, 2016. The Trump campaign said it would “impose enormous costs on American households through higher electricity prices and higher taxes.” The statement went on to say, "As our nation considers these issues, Mr. Trump and Gov. Pence appreciate that many scientists are concerned about greenhouse gas emissions. We need America's scientists to continue studying the scientific issues but without political agendas getting in the way. We also need to be vigilant to defend the interests of the American people in any efforts taken on this front."[32]

* Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said on September 27, 2016, that Trump believes global warming is naturally occurring and humans are not the cause.[33]

* Responding to a questionnaire published in Scientific American on September 13, 2016, Trump said, “There is still much that needs to be investigated in the field of 'climate change.' Perhaps the best use of our limited financial resources should be in dealing with making sure that every person in the world has clean water. Perhaps we should focus on eliminating lingering diseases around the world like malaria. Perhaps we should focus on efforts to increase food production to keep pace with an ever-growing world population. Perhaps we should be focused on developing energy sources and power production that alleviates the need for dependence on fossil fuels. We must decide on how best to proceed so that we can make lives better, safer and more prosperous.”[34]

* Trump delivered a speech on energy production at an oil and natural gas conference in North Dakota on May 26, 2016. Through the use of untapped domestic oil and gas reserves, Trump said that he would make the U.S. independent from foreign oil providers. If elected, he also pledged to take the following actions in his first 100 days in office: rescind the Climate Action Plan and Waters of the U.S. rule, support the renewal of the Keystone XL Pipeline project, cancel the Paris Climate Agreement, and reform the regulatory environment. The merit of future regulations, Trump said, would be determined by asking, “Is this regulation good for the American worker?”[35][36][37]

* In a January 2014 interview on FOX News, Donald Trump said climate change was a hoax.[38] Two years earlier, Trump tweeted, "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive."[39]

##### Fracking[edit]

* While campaigning in Colorado Springs, Colo., on July 29, 2016, reporter Brandon Rittiman asked Trump about a fracking ballot measure that would change the state constitution to allow municipalities to ban oil and gas exploration. "Well, I’m in favor of fracking, but I think that voters should have a big say in it,” Trump told the reporter. “I mean, there’s some areas, maybe, they don’t want to have fracking. And I think if the voters are voting for it, that’s up to them… If a municipality or a state wants to ban fracking, I can understand that.”[40]

##### Keystone XL Pipeline[edit]

* In an interview with Greta Van Sustern on FOX News in January 2012, Trump criticized President Barack Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline. He said, "Frankly, we don't need Canada. We should just be able to drill our own oil. As long as it's there we certainly should have approved it. It was jobs and cheaper oil. It's just absolutely incredible. I guess President Obama took care of the environmentalists, but it is absolutely terrible. And it is not an environmental problem at all in any way, shape, or form."[41]

* Read more of Donald Trump's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

The 2016 Republican Party Platform on energy and environmental policy

| “  | America’s Natural Resources: Energy and the Environment

We are the party of America’s growers, producers, farmers, ranchers, foresters, miners, commercial fishermen, and all those who bring from the earth the crops, minerals, energy, and the bounties of our seas that are the lifeblood of our economy. Their labor and ingenuity, their determination in bad times and love of the land at all times, powers our economy, creates millions of jobs, and feeds billions of people around the world. Only a few years ago, a bipartisan consensus in government valued the role of extractive industries and rewarded their enterprise by minimizing its interference with their work. That has radically changed. We look in vain within the Democratic Party for leaders who will speak for the people of agriculture, energy and mineral production. ... A New Era in Energy
Our country has greater energy resources than any other place on earth. Our engineers and miners, the men and women whose labor taps the forces of nature, are the best in the world. Together, the people of America’s energy sector provide us with power that is clean, affordable, secure, and abundant. Their work can guarantee the nation’s energy security for centuries to come if, instead of erecting roadblocks, government facilitates the creation of an all-of-the-above energy strategy.

We applaud congressional Republicans for doing just that through far-sighted legislation. Both Houses have passed bills that will modernize pipelines and the electric grid, protect the grid from disruption, expedite energy exports, and lower energy costs. A Republican administration will build on those policies to find new ways to store electricity, a breakthrough of extraordinary import. Planning for our energy future requires us to first determine what resources we have in reserve. Thirty years ago, the world’s estimated reserves of oil were 645 billion barrels. Today, that figure is 1.65 trillion barrels. The more we know what we will have in the future, the better we can decide how to use it. That is why we support the opening of public lands and the outer continental shelf to exploration and responsible production, even if these resources will not be immediately developed. Because we believe states can best promote economic growth while protecting the environment, Congress should give authority to state regulators to manage energy resources on federally controlled public lands within their respective borders.

The Democratic Party’s energy policy can be summed up in a slogan currently popular among its activists: “keep it in the ground.” Keeping energy in the earth will keep jobs out of reach of those who need them most. For low-income Americans, expensive energy means colder homes in the winter and hotter homes in the summer, less mobility in employment, and higher food prices. The current Administration, and particularly its EPA, seems not to care. Its Clean Power Plan — the centerpiece of the President’s war on coal — has been stayed by the Supreme Court. We will do away with it altogether. The Democratic Party does not understand that coal is an abundant, clean, affordable, reliable domestic energy resource. Those who mine it and their families should be protected from the Democratic Party’s radical anti-coal agenda.

The Democratic Party’s campaign to smother the U.S. energy industry takes many forms, but the permitting process may be its most damaging weapon. It takes an average of 30 days for states to permit an oil or gas well. It takes the federal government longer than seven months. Three decades ago, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) leased 12.2 million acres. In 2014, it leased only one-tenth of that number. Our nuclear industry, cleanly generating almost 20 percent of our electricity from its 99 plants, has a remarkable safety record, but only a handful of plants have been permitted in over three decades. Permitting for a safe, non-polluting hydroelectric facility, even one that is being relicensed, can take many years because of the current President’s hostility to dams. The Keystone Pipeline has become a symbol of everything wrong with the current Administration’s ideological approach. After years of delay, the President killed it to satisfy environmental extremists. We intend to finish that pipeline and others as part of our commitment to North American energy security.

Government should not play favorites among energy producers. The taxpayers will not soon forget the current Administration’s subsidies to companies that went bankrupt without producing a kilowatt of energy. The same Administration now requires the Department of Defense, operating with slashed budgets during a time of expanding conflict, to use its scarce resources to generate 25 percent of its electricity from renewables by 2025. Climate change is far from this nation’s most pressing national security issue. This is the triumph of extremism over common sense, and Congress must stop it.

We support the development of all forms of energy that are marketable in a free economy without subsidies, including coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power, and hydropower. A federal judge has struck down the BLM’s rule on hydraulic fracturing and we support upholding this decision. We respect the states’ proven ability to regulate the use of hydraulic fracturing, methane emissions, and horizontal drilling, and we will end the Administration’s disregard of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act with respect to the long-term storage of nuclear waste.

We encourage the cost-effective development of renewable energy sources — wind, solar, biomass, biofuel, geothermal, and tidal energy — by private capital. The United States is overwhelmingly dependent on China and other nations for rare earth and other hardrock minerals. These minerals are critical to advanced technology, renewable energy, and defense manufacturing. We support expediting the permitting process for mineral production on public lands. We support lifting restrictions to allow responsible development of nuclear energy, including research into alternative processes like thorium nuclear energy. We oppose any carbon tax. It would increase energy prices across the board, hitting hardest at the families who are already struggling to pay their bills in the Democrats’ no-growth economy. We urge the private sector to focus its resources on the development of carbon capture and sequestration technology still in its early stages here and overseas. American energy producers should be free to export their product to foreign markets. This is particularly important because of international demand for liquefied natural gas, and we must expedite the energy export terminals currently blocked by the Administration. Energy exports will create high paying jobs throughout the United States, reduce our nation’s trade deficit, grow our economy, and boost the energy security of our allies and trading partners.

We remain committed to aggressively expanding trade opportunities and opening new markets for American energy through multilateral and bilateral agreements, whether current, pending, or negotiated in the future. Energy is both an economic and national security issue. We support the enactment of policies to increase domestic energy production, including production on public lands, to counter market manipulation by OPEC and other nationally-owned oil companies. This will reduce America’s vulnerability to energy price volatility.

Environmental Progress
Conservation is inherent in conservatism. As the pioneer of environmentalism a century ago, the Republican Party reaffirms the moral obligation to be good stewards of the God-given natural beauty and resources of our country. We believe that people are the most valuable resources and that human health and safety are the proper measurements of a policy’s success. We assert that private ownership has been the best guarantee of conscientious stewardship, while some of the worst instances of degradation have occurred under government control. Poverty, not wealth, is the gravest threat to the environment, while steady economic growth brings the technological advances which make environmental progress possible.

The environment is too important to be left to radical environmentalists. They are using yesterday’s tools to control a future they do not comprehend. The environmental establishment has become a self-serving elite, stuck in the mindset of the 1970s, subordinating the public’s consensus to the goals of the Democratic Party. Their approach is based on shoddy science, scare tactics, and centralized command-and-control regulation. Over the last eight years, the Administration has triggered an avalanche of regulation that wreaks havoc across our economy and yields minimal environmental benefits.

The central fact of any sensible environmental policy is that, year by year, the environment is improving. Our air and waterways are much healthier than they were a few decades ago. As a nation, we have drastically reduced pollution, mainstreamed recycling, educated the public, and avoided ecological degradation. Even if no additional controls are added, air pollution will continue to decline for the next several decades due to technological turnover of aging equipment. These successes become a challenge for Democratic Party environmental extremists, who must reach farther and demand more to sustain the illusion of an environmental crisis. That is why they routinely ignore costs, exaggerate benefits, and advocate the breaching of constitutional boundaries by federal agencies to impose environmental regulation. At the same time, the environmental establishment looks the other way when environmental degradation is caused by the EPA and other federal agencies as was the case during the Animas River spill. Our agenda is high on job creation, expanding opportunity and providing a better chance at life for everyone willing to work for it. Our modern approach to environmentalism is directed to that end, and it starts with dramatic change in official Washington. We propose to shift responsibility for environmental regulation from the federal bureaucracy to the states and to transform the EPA into an independent bipartisan commission, similar to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with structural safeguards against politicized science. We will strictly limit congressional delegation of rule-making authority, and require that citizens be compensated for regulatory takings.

We will put an end to the legal practice known as “sue and settle,” in which environmental groups sue federal agencies whose officials are complicit in the litigation so that, with the taxpayers excluded, both parties can reach agreement behind closed doors. That deceit betrays the public’s trust; it will no longer be tolerated. We will also reform the Equal Access to Justice Act to cap and disclose payments made to environmental activists and return the Act to its original intent.

We will enforce the original intent of the Clean Water Act, not it’s distortion by EPA regulations. We will likewise forbid the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide, something never envisioned when Congress passed the Clean Air Act. We will restore to Congress the authority to set the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and modernize the permitting process under the National Environmental Policy Act so it can no longer invite frivolous lawsuits, thwart sorely needed projects, kill jobs, and strangle growth.

The federal government owns or controls over 640 million acres of land in the United States, most of which is in the West. These are public lands, and the public should have access to them for appropriate activities like hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting. Federal ownership or management of land also places an economic burden on counties and local communities in terms of lost revenue to pay for things such as schools, police, and emergency services. It is absurd to think that all that acreage must remain under the absentee ownership or management of official Washington. Congress shall immediately pass universal legislation providing for a timely and orderly mechanism requiring the federal government to convey certain federally controlled public lands to states. We call upon all national and state leaders and representatives to exert their utmost power and influence to urge the transfer of those lands, identified in the review process, to all willing states for the benefit of the states and the nation as a whole. The residents of state and local communities know best how to protect the land where they work and live. They practice boots-on-the-ground conservation in their states every day.

We support amending the Antiquities Act of 1906 to establish Congress’ right to approve the designation of national monuments and to further require the approval of the state where a national monument is designated or a national park is proposed. There is certainly a need to protect certain species threatened worldwide with extinction. However, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) should not include species such as gray wolves and other species if these species exist elsewhere in healthy numbers in another state or country. To upset the economic viability of an area with an unneeded designation costs jobs and hurts local communities. We must ensure that this protection is done effectively, reasonably, and without unnecessarily impeding the development of lands and natural resources. The ESA should ensure that the listing of endangered species and the designation of critical habitats are based upon sound science and balance the protection of endangered species with the costs of compliance and the rights of property owners. Instead, over the last few decades, the ESA has stunted economic development, halted the construction of projects, burdened landowners, and has been used to pursue policy goals inconsistent with the ESA — all with little to no success in the actual recovery of species. For example, we oppose the listing of the lesser prairie chicken and the potential listing of the sage grouse. Neither species has been shown to be in actual danger and the listings threaten to devastate farmers, ranchers, and oil and gas production. While species threatened with extinction must be protected under the ESA, any such protection must be done in a reasonable and transparent manner with stakeholder input and in consideration of the impact on the development of lands and natural resources.

Information concerning a changing climate, especially projections into the long-range future, must be based on dispassionate analysis of hard data. We will enforce that standard throughout the executive branch, among civil servants and presidential appointees alike. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a political mechanism, not an unbiased scientific institution. Its unreliability is reflected in its intolerance toward scientists and others who dissent from its orthodoxy. We will evaluate its recommendations accordingly. We reject the agendas of both the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement, which represent only the personal commitments of their signatories; no such agreement can be binding upon the United States until it is submitted to and ratified by the Senate. We demand an immediate halt to U.S. funding for the U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in accordance with the 1994 Foreign Relations Authorization Act. That law prohibits Washington from giving any money to “any affiliated organization of the United Nations” which grants Palestinians membership as a state. There is no ambiguity in that language. It would be illegal for the President to follow through on his intention to provide millions in funding for the UNFCCC and hundreds of millions for its Green Climate Fund. We firmly believe environmental problems are best solved by giving incentives for human ingenuity and the development of new technologies, not through top-down, command-and-control regulations that stifle economic growth and cost thousands of jobs.[20]

| ”

|
|

—2016 Republican Party Platform[42]

###  Mike Pence[edit]

##### Energy production[edit]

* In April 2014, Mike Pence sent a letter to President Barack Obama urging him to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. He wrote, "It has broad bipartisan support in the Congress of the United States. It’s going to mean jobs in this country and it’s going to add to an energy infrastructure that will continue to contribute to our energy independence."[43]

* In 2010, Pence co-sponsored H.R.5772 - To limit the moratorium on certain permitting and drilling activities issued by the Secretary of the Interior, and for other purposes.[44]

##### Energy consumption[edit]

* In March 2014, SB 340 became law without Mike Pence's signature of approval or veto. According to the Indy Star, the law "shut down the Energizing Indiana program, under which energy auditors­ visit homes and businesses and recommend ways to reduce energy consumption. Typical recommendations include switching to energy-efficient light bulbs, wrapping pipes in insulation, turning down the temperature on water heaters and getting rid of old, energy-gobbling refrigerators."[45][46]

* Pence did not veto the bill "because doing so would increase the cost of utilities for Hoosier ratepayers and make Indiana less competitive by denying relief to large electricity consumers, including our state's manufacturing base."[45]

##### Cap and trade[edit]

* Mike Pence voted against H.R.2454 - the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, which, among other things, proposed "establishing a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and setting goals for reducing such emissions from covered sources by 83% of 2005 levels by 2050."[47]

##### Environmental Protection Agency[edit]

* Mike Pence voted for H.R.3409 - the Stop the War on Coal Act of 2012, which, among other things, proposed amending "the Clean Air Act (CAA) to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration, the emission of a greenhouse gas (GHG) to address climate change. Excludes GHGs from the definition of 'air pollutant' for purposes of addressing climate change."[48]

* In 2011, Pence voted for a bill H.R.2273 - the Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act, which proposed amending "the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize states to adopt and implement coal combustion residuals permit programs. Requires each state governor to notify the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) within six months about whether such state will implement such a program."[49]
* Read more of Mike Pence's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.'

## Green ticket[edit]

###  Jill Stein[edit]

* On September 7, 2016, warrants were filed in Morton County, North Dakota, for the arrest of Jill Stein and her running mate, Ajamu Baraka, for misdemeanor charges of criminal trespass and criminal mischief. They allegedly vandalized equipment at a construction site to protest the Dakota Access pipeline. Stein called her actions civil disobedience. She added, “I hope the North Dakota authorities press charges against the real vandalism taking place at the Standing Rock Sioux reservation: the bulldozing of sacred burial sites and the unleashing of vicious attack dogs."[50]

* In an interview on Fox Business on August 26, 2016, Stein said, “What the science actually says and the studies and the experts say that if we have the political will, we can convert. And it’s not just a matter of shutting down fossil fuel—it’s a matter of creating the good jobs for the economy of the future that’s healthy for us as people and healthy for the planet. … Fortunately, we save so much money by the health improvements from phasing out fossil fuels—it’s actually enough to pay for those jobs to ensure the green energy transition.”[51]

* Jill Stein tweeted on August 11, 2016, “My attorney general will prosecute Exxon for lying to the world about climate change. We need to end fossil fuels before it's too late.”[52]

* On January 26, 2016, Stein said, "No human being should be condemned to drink water contaminated by a neurotoxin.” Stein called for criminal prosecution of the governor and other public officials who were aware of the water contamination in Flint, Michigan, immediate federal and state intervention to resolve Flint’s water crisis, and federal investment in the nation’s water system.[53]

* In a November 29, 2015, interview with The Harvard Crimson, Stein said she “hopes to replicate key aspects of the New Deal legislation,” which she believes “would allow the US to become fully dependent on renewable energy within 15 years.” She said the plan “revives the economy, creates well paying living wage jobs that we desperately need at the same time that it greens the economy and the energy system and therefore turns the tide on climate change and makes wars for oil obsolete. It’s a win-win.”[54]

* As part of the "Green New Deal" promoted on her 2016 presidential campaign website, Stein supported "transitioning to 100% clean renewable energy by 2030."[55]

* Stein was charged with trespassing when she attempted to provide food to activists protesting the Keystone XL pipeline in October 2012.[56]

* On Stein's 2012 presidential campaign website, she listed five action items she would take to improve the environment.

* "Create millions of green jobs in areas such as weatherization, recycling, public transportation, worker and community owned cooperatives, and energy-efficient infrastructure."[57]

* "Adopt the EPA's new tougher standards on ozone pollution."[57]

* "Promote conversion to sustainable, nontoxic materials."[57]

* "Promote use of closed-loop, zero waste processes."[57]

* "Promote organic agriculture, permaculture, and sustainable forestry."[57]

##### Climate change[edit]

* On June 28, 2016, Jill Stein “said that the proposed deal with Mexico and Canada to go to 50% carbon-free electricity from 2025 is inadequate to meet the climate goals set in Paris,” according to a press release from her campaign. Stein said, "Obama's proposals are a step in the right direction but way too little. We need an emergency national mobilization similar to what our country did after Pearl Harbor at the outset of WWII." Stein proposes transitioning “to 100% clean energy for everything - not just electricity – by 2030 while creating 20 million jobs and avoiding hundreds of thousands of annual ‘excess deaths’ from air pollution.”[58]

* During a February 15, 2016, interview with Chris Hedges posted on TheRealNews.com, Stein said, "[W]e are facing an all-out climate emergency."[59]

##### Fracking[edit]

* After traveling to Paris to participate in events related to the United Nations Climate Change Conference, Stein said in a statement on December 11, 2015, “The voluntary, unenforceable pledges being produced by COP21 are entirely insufficient to prevent catastrophic climate change. Scientific analysis shows that these pledges will lead us to 3 degrees Celsius global temperature rise - and that will be catastrophic." She added that the spread of the hydrofracking industry in the U.S. “is leading to a spreading cancer of polluted groundwater and fracked gas pipelines.”[60]

* Read more of Jill Stein's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

The 2016 Green Party Platform on energy and environmental policy

| “  | III. Ecological Sustainability (2016)

The human community is an element of the Earth community, not the other way around. All human endeavors are situated within the dynamics of the biosphere. If we wish to have sustainable institutions and enterprises, they must fit well with the processes of the Earth. The ideology of industrialism, in both capitalist and communist countries, insists that modern society lives on top of nature and should rightly use and despoil the rest of the natural world as we desire— because any loss of the ecosystems is merely an "externality" in economic thought and because any problems can be addressed later by a technological fix. We are now living through the painful consequences of that arrogant, ignorant perspective. Many of our children suffer from accumulations of mercury and other toxins in their neurological systems, environmentally related cancer is on the rise, and our air and water are increasingly polluted. Meanwhile, our ecosystems are being compromised by the spreading presence of genetically engineered organisms.

Our houses and buildings, manufacturing processes, and industrial agriculture were all designed with the assumption of an endless supply of cheap and readily available fossil fuels. Pollution and despoiling the land were not part of the thinking. The Green Party, however, is optimistic about the alternatives that now exist and that could be encouraged through tax policy and the market incentives of fuel efficiency. We also challenge the grip of the oil, automotive, and automobile insurance industries that have managed to block or roll back progress in public mass transit. The gutting of subsidies for the railroads has meant not only fewer passenger routes but also the addition of thousands of large freight trucks on our highways, decreasing public safety and increasing pollution. We are committed to extending the greening of waste management by encouraging the spread of such practices as reduce, return, reuse, and recycle. We strongly oppose the recent attempts to roll back the federal environmental protection laws that safeguard our air, water, and soil.

The health of the life-support systems— the ecosystems on our continent — is of paramount importance. Inherent in the efficient dynamics of those ecosystems is a vital profusion of biodiversity. Therefore, the Greens call for a halt to the destruction of habitats, which are being sacrificed to unqualified economic expansion. We humans have a moral responsibility to all of our relations, many of which are facing extinction because we carelessly and permanently halt their long evolutionary journey.

The Green Party also supports the spread of organic agriculture and the careful tending of our nation's precious remaining topsoil. We support planetary efforts to slow the ever-increasing numbers of humans pressuring the ecosystems, and we especially support the reduction of consumption of the world's raw materials by the industrialized Northern Hemisphere. We are appalled by our country's withdrawal from serious efforts to limit greenhouse gases that are contributing mightily to global climate disruption. The Green Party strongly urges the United States to adopt an actively responsible position in this crisis and to take significant action to address the problem.

A. Climate Change
OUR POSITION

Greens want to stop runaway climate change, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions at least 40% by 2020 and 95% by 2050, over 1990 levels.

Climate change is the gravest environmental, social and economic peril that humanity has ever met. Across the world, it is causing vanishing polar ice, melting glaciers, growing deserts, stronger storms, rising oceans, less biodiversity, deepening droughts, as well as more disease, hunger, strife and human misery. It is a tragedy unfolding in slow motion.

Greenhouse gases warm the Earth by trapping heat in the atmosphere. Much of that heat is initially absorbed by the ocean, creating roughly a 30-year delay in the impact of that heat at the surface of the planet. Practically speaking, that means that the melting glaciers and expanding deserts of 2009 were the result of greenhouse gases dumped into the atmosphere in the late 1970s, when the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was below 350 parts per million (ppm). To return to a safe level of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere, we must reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases as quickly as possible to levels that existed before 1980, to 350ppm carbon dioxide.

Greens support science-based policies to curb climate change. We have an ambitious plan to make drastic changes quickly to avert global catastrophe. We will expend maximum effort to preserve a planet friendly to life as we know it by curtailing greenhouse gas emissions and actively removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

GREEN SOLUTIONS

1\. Strong International Climate Treaty

The climate treaty reached in Paris in December, 2015 is inadequate to address the climate change crisis.

The 195 nations involved pledged to reduce greenhouse gases. The pledges are not mandatory, however. The treaty does not require the phase out of fossil fuels, and it delays higher aid levels for poorer nations until 2025.

We call for legally binding commitments for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% by 2020 and a 95% reduction by 2050 over 1990 levels. We also call for the immediate assumption of responsibility by wealthy nations to financially assist poorer countries struggling with the effects of climate change.

2\. Economic Policy For A Safer Climate

a. Enact a Fee & Dividend system on fossil fuels to enable the free market to include the environmental costs of their extraction and use. These fees shall be applied as far upstream as possible, either when fuel passes from extraction to refining, distribution or consumption; or when it first enters the United States' jurisdiction. The carbon fee will initially be small, a dime per kilogram of carbon, to avoid creating a shock to the economy. The fee will be increased by 10% each year that global atmospheric carbon dioxide content is greater than 350 ppm, decreased 10% each year it's less than 300 ppm, and repealed entirely when it falls below 250 ppm.

b. Although imported fossil fuel has no more impact on global climate change than domestic, importing petroleum and natural gas has a catastrophic impact on American foreign policy and the American economy. We will enact this same fee on imported fossil fuels a second time to give the free market an incentive to wean America off foreign oil and gas.

c. The Green Party calls for elimination of subsidies for fossil fuels, nuclear power, biomass and waste incineration and biofuels. We must also acknowledge that the bulk of our military budget is, in fact, an indirect subsidy for oil & gas corporations.

d. To prevent perverse incentives arising from higher carbon prices, the Green Party mandates clean fuels in addition to pricing carbon. Otherwise dirty energy sources like nuclear power, biomass and biofuels that are not subject to carbon pricing will become economically competitive.

3\. Repay Our Climate Debt

a. Pay for adaptation to climate change in countries with less responsibility for climate change.

b. Provide a carbon neutral development path for those countries that can no longer be permitted to develop in the same way we did—by burning cheap fossil fuels.

4\. More Efficiency And Conservation

a. Adopt energy efficiency standards that reduce energy demand economy-wide by 50% over the next 20–30 years. The U.S. can make massive reductions in its energy use through a combination of conservation and efficiency measures. We don't actually need any additional power. Instead, we can and should reduce our consumption of power.

b. Build an efficient, low cost public transportation system. The best incentive we can provide to live closer to work and reduce the use of private vehicles is to make the alternative inexpensive and convenient to use.

c. Adopt a national zero waste policy. The less we consume and throw away, the less we will need to produce and replace.

5\. Clean, Green Energy and Jobs

a. Create an inclusive program to train workers for the new, clean energy economy. Focusing on both the environment and social justice, prioritize the creation of green jobs in communities of color and low-income communities.

b. Transition to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050, with at least 80 percent achieved by 2030, using wind, solar, ocean, small-scale hydro, and geothermal power. Renewable energy is technically and economically feasible. The barriers to a renewable energy economy come from economic, political and social interests, and are not technical.

c. End the use of nuclear power. Nuclear energy is massively polluting, dangerous, financially risky, expensive and slow to implement. Our money is better spent on wind, solar, geothermal, conservation and small-scale hydroelectric.

d. Stop "dirty clean energy." Many of the "solutions" offered in climate legislation aren't real solutions. Biomass incineration (trees, crops, construction debris and certain types of waste), landfill gas and many types of biofuels will dump massive quantities of toxic pollutants into the air and water, and some of these energy sources produce more greenhouse gas emissions than coal. Natural gas is primarily methane, which is 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. Consequently, when pipeline leakage is considered, the clean-burning characteristics of natural gas can be lost, resulting in a fuel with climate impacts as bad as coal. Biomass and biofuels will also increase deforestation, contributing to more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

6\. Clean, Green Agriculture

a. Convert U.S farm and ranchland to organic practices. Chemical and industrial agriculture produces 35-50% of climate destabilizing greenhouse gases.

b. Switch to local food production and distribution. Localized, organic food production and distribution reduce fossil fuel usage and enriches soil that sequesters more carbon dioxide.

c. Reduce methane, nitrous oxide and other greenhouse gases by rapidly phasing out confined animal feeding operations, and encouraging a reduction in meat consumption.

B. Energy

The United States has a high-energy-consumption economy based mainly on fossil energy. The extraction, refining, and combustion of fossil fuels have proved extremely harmful to the environment, and supplies are rapidly being depleted. Over the past century, the infrastructure of our civilization has become utterly dependent on plentiful oil, coal, and natural gas: vast land, air, and sea transportation networks; increasing dependence on imported goods; industrialized food production dependent on fertilizer and biocides; and sprawling, car-dependent neighborhoods and workplaces. Our electric grid depends on fossil fuels for two-thirds of its energy.

Dirty and dangerous energy sources have generated an unparalleled assault on the environment and human rights. In the U.S., low income communities and communities of color bear the greatest burden of health impacts due to exposure to emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants. Native American communities have been devastated by uranium mining, and the people of Appalachia watch helplessly as their ancient mountains are destroyed for coal-fired electricity. Regional and global peaks in supply are driving up costs and threatening wars and social chaos. [See section on Climate Change, above]

Since 1859 when the first commercial oil well was drilled in Pennsylvania, the global community has consumed about half what nature generated over hundreds of millions of years. Although coal is more abundant than oil, it is inherently dirtier than oil, is limited in terms of its use as a vehicle fuel, and demand is skyrocketing globally for use in electricity generation. Natural Gas is also in high demand for power production and is ultimately finite. We must plan and prepare for the end of fossil fuels now, while we still have energy available to build the cleaner, more sustainable energy infrastructure that we will soon need.

To simply substitute better energy sources in place of fossil fuels is not the answer for two main reasons. First, there are no energy sources (renewable or otherwise) capable of supplying energy as cheaply and in such abundance as fossil fuels currently yield in the time that we need them to come online. Second, we have designed and built our infrastructure to suit the unique characteristics of oil, natural gas, and coal.

The energy transition cannot be accomplished with a minor retrofit of existing energy infrastructure. Just as our fossil fuel economy differs from the agrarian economy of 1800, the post-fossil fuel economy of 2050 will be profoundly different from all that we are familiar with now. Changes would occur if we wait for the price of fossil fuels to reflect scarcity, forcing society to adapt; however, lack of government planning will result in a transition that is chaotic, painful, destructive, and possibly not survivable.

The Green Party advocates a rapid reduction in energy consumption through energy efficiency and a decisive transition away from fossil and nuclear power toward cleaner, renewable, local energy sources. Toward these goals, we advocate:

1\. Encourage Conservation

Encourage conservation and a significant decrease in our energy consumption, institute national energy efficiency standards.

With five percent of the world's population, U.S residents consume twenty-six percent of the world's energy. U.S. consumption of electricity is almost nine times greater than the average for the rest of the world. These are not sustainable levels.

a. The U.S. must retrofit its building stock for energy efficiency. Most U.S. residents live in homes that require heat during the winter, and most are inadequately insulated. Buildings in the South require air conditioning during the summer. Fuel shortages, power outages, and energy price hikes could bring not just discomfort, but a massive increase in mortality from cold and heat. Millions of buildings can and must be super-insulated and, as much as possible, provided with alternative heat sources (passive solar, geothermal, or district heating).

b. Energy efficiency standards similar to those in California must be adopted nationally. The energy efficiency standards adopted there in the late 1970s have resulted in overall electricity-use remaining flat over the past three decades while the population has steadily increased. During the same time period electricity use in the rest of the U.S. has climbed along with population growth.

c. There are many different ways to increase energy efficiency and the best path for one region of the country might differ from that of another. We will need concerted effort to increase efficiency in every sector of our economy. Technologies exist that, if widely implemented, can result in huge energy savings.

d. Cogeneration and use of waste heat to generate electricity should be encouraged.

e. A carbon tax, which the Green Party supports, would serve as an important market incentive to increase efficiency.

2\. Move to Renewable Sources

Move decisively to an energy system based on solar, wind, geo-thermal, marine, and other cleaner renewable energy sources.

The development of Earth-gentle, sustainable energy sources must be a cornerstone of any plan to reduce reliance on conventional fossil fuels. The Green Party advocates clean renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal, marine-based, and other cleaner renewable sources as the long-term solution.

a. Many other solutions being pushed, including nuclear power, coal, industrial-scale biofuels, and low-grade fossil fuels such as oil shale and tar sands, create more problems than they solve.

b. Further research with increased government support is needed into new energy storage technologies, as well as new cheaper and non-toxic photovoltaic materials and processes, and new geothermal and ocean power technologies.

c. Policy tools to directly support the development of renewable energy sources, such as Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and Feed-in Tariffs, should also be reviewed for effectiveness. In general, a feed-in tariff is legislation enacted by the government that requires the large electric utilities to guarantee a price for the renewably generated electricity fed into the grid. When done right, such as in Germany, this policy appears to succeed in harnessing entrepreneurial zeal.

d. State-level financing policies like California's AB 811 can help homeowners install expensive renewable energy where the county pays the up-front cost and the system is paid for via the homeowner's property taxes.

e. Greens support voluntary purchase of tradable renewable energy certificates; however, voluntary approaches are not sufficient.

f. Greens support research into advanced fuels when the purpose of the research is to develop a fuel that in its full cycle does not create more problems than it solves. We support the use of hydrogen as an energy storage medium; however we oppose the use of nuclear technologies or carbon-based feedstocks for hydrogen production.

g. We call for a ban on the construction of large-scale and inappropriately-located, hydroelectric dams.

3\. Eliminate dirty & dangerous energy sources

The Green Party advocates the phase-out of nuclear and coal power plants. All processes associated with nuclear power are dangerous, from the mining of uranium to the transportation and disposal of the radioactive waste. Coal is the largest contributor to climate change with estimates as high as 80%.

The generation of nuclear waste must be halted. It is hazardous for thousands of years and there is no way to isolate it from the biosphere for the duration of its toxic life. We oppose public subsidies for nuclear power. Cost is another huge factor making it unfeasible, with each new nuclear power plant costing billions of dollars.

The Green Party calls for a formal moratorium on the construction of new nuclear power plants, the early retirement of existing nuclear power reactors, and the phase-out of technologies that use or produce nuclear waste, such as nuclear waste incinerators, food irradiators, and all uses of depleted uranium.

We call for a ban on mountaintop removal coal mining. With limited supplies and in the absence of commercially viable "clean coal" carbon sequestration, which may never be feasible, coal is neither an economically nor an environmentally sustainable solution.

We call for the cessation of development of fuels produced with polluting, energy-intensive processes or from unsustainable or toxic feed stocks, such as genetically-engineered crops, coal and waste streams contaminated with persistent toxics.

We oppose further oil and gas drilling or exploration on our nation's outer continental shelf, on our public lands, in the Rocky Mountains, and under the Great Lakes.

Due to serious negative impacts on food, soil, and water, we oppose industrial-scale biofuels production and biomass burning for electric power generation. We approve small scale distributed production under local control, such as production of biodiesel from waste oils, production of charcoal and byproducts from wood wastes or sustainably harvested wood, small scale production of ethanol from crop wastes or maize stalk sugar, or production of fuel gas for localized electricity generation from anaerobic methane digesters or charcoal gasifiers. We do not object to the utilization of fuel gases seeping from landfills, as that is one way to reduce air pollution. We support as a minimum standard the Principles for Sustainable Biomass statement signed by Clean Water Action, Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, Geos Institute, Greenpeace USA, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, Southern Environmental Law Center, Union of Concerned Scientists, The Wilderness Society, and World Wildlife Fund.

The Green Party stands for the enactment of bans on hydraulic fracturing for natural gas and oil on the local, state and federal level and stands for bans on the disposal of wastes created by the fracking industry.

4\. Decentralize the Grid

Plan for decentralized, bioregional electricity generation and distribution.

Decentralized power systems are likely to be more resilient in the face of power disruptions and will cut transmission losses, assure citizens greater control of their power grids, and prevent the massive ecological and social destruction that accompanies production of electricity in mega-scale projects.

a. We support"smart grid"upgrades. The federal government must step in to set goals and standards and to provide capital. This effort must not favor commercial utilities over municipal power districts.

b. The Green Party supports net metering to make decentralized energy production economically viable.

c. Greens support tax-exempt bonds to finance public ownership of utilities and to allow publicly owned utilities to finance conservation and renewable energy projects.

d. We oppose deregulation of the energy industry.

5\. Re-localize the Food System

De-carbonize and re-localize the food system.

Our national industrial food system is overwhelmingly dependent upon oil and natural gas for farm-equipment fuel, fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, and the transport. It is responsible for over 12% of all greenhouse gases from human activities in the U.S. New farming methods, new farmers, and a re-localization of production and distribution are needed. These will require land reform, an investment in revitalizing rural areas and the creation of local food processing plants and storage centers. Laws and incentives affecting the food system (including food safety laws and farm subsidies) will need to be rewritten to provide preferential support for small-scale, local, low-input producers.

6\. Electrify the Transportation System

Our enormous investment in highways, airports, cars, buses, trucks, and aircraft is almost completely dependent on oil, and it will be significantly handicapped by higher fuel prices, and devastated by actual fuel shortages. The electrification of road-based vehicles is a must and will require at least two decades to fully deploy and we must move to Earth-gentle electricity generation to charge the vehicles. Meanwhile, existing private automobiles must be put to use more efficiently through carpooling, car-sharing, and ride-sharing networks. [See Transportation section below for more, including need for dramatic increase in CAFE or gasoline efficiency standards]

7\. Requirements for Energy Transition

a. Investment: Enormous amounts of investment capital will be needed to accomplish the energy transition, much more than the promise of $150 billion for renewable energy over ten years, and must now come from government.

b. Coordination: The energy transition will be complex and comprehensive, and its various strategies will be mutually impacting. For example, efforts to redirect transport away from highways and toward rail service will need to be coordinated with manufacturers, farmers, retailers, and employers. An independent federal Energy Transition Office should track and manage the transition.

c. Education: Community colleges should prepare workers for new job opportunities, e.g., sustainable food production, renewable energy installation, grid rebuilding, rail expansion, public transport construction, and home energy retrofitting. Grade school curriculum should include gardening programs in all schools and increased emphasis on energy conservation.

d. Public Messaging & Goal Setting: Our leaders must instill in the nation a sense of collective struggle and of a long journey toward a clear goal. The success of a project of this scope will require public buy-in at every stage and level, including the use of language and images to continually underscore what is at stake, to foster a spirit of cooperation and willing sacrifice.

Business leaders, advertising agencies and even Hollywood must be enlisted, a quid pro quo for government bail out of banks and corporations. Grassroots initiatives, such as the Transition Towns movement, could lead the way toward voluntary community efforts. A sophisticated, interactive, web-based program would inspire action and provide resources. Ratepayers should get full disclosure of the specific electric generating facilities used to produce their electricity.

A series of challenging yet feasible targets should be set, with the ultimate goal—complete freedom from fossil fuel dependency — to be achieved by 2050. The federal government should take the lead by setting targets for federal facilities. Achievement of annual targets should be cause for public celebration.[20]

| ”

|
|

—2016 Green Party Platform[61]

###  Ajamu Baraka[edit]

* On October 18, 2016, Baraka tweeted about energy and the economy. He wrote, "Do you know why they're afraid of us? Because set real goals: like transitioning our energy system and economy to 100% clean energy by 2030." He also wrote, "A Green Party ticket is one which will work to end destructive energy extraction and protect future generations."[62][63]
* Baraka advocated for transitioning to renewable and sustainable forms of energy. On September 30, 2016, he tweeted, "The US gov't spends billions yearly subsidizing fossil fuels industries. We need to be subsidizing renewable forms of energy."[64] On October 7, 2016, he wrote, "#SteinBaraka adm. will invest in small, locally owned & operated sustainable energy cooperatives. Not disastrous fossil fuel corporations."[65]
* On September 30, 2016, Baraka took to Twitter to define the term "green economy." He wrote, "A Green Economy = well paid jobs that don't kill you or the environment; single-payer insurance; abolishing student debt & ending poverty."[66]
* On September 7, 2016, Baraka and his running mate Jill Stein were charged with criminal trespass and criminal mischief while protesting the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline in North Dakota. The pipeline was designed to connect North Dakota's Bakken shale formation with Gulf coast oil refineries.[67]
* Read more about Ajamu Baraka.

## Libertarian ticket[edit]

###  Gary Johnson[edit]

* In a speech on September 14, 2016, Johnson said, “Government I think has a fundamental responsibility to protect us against those that would do us harm, in this case pollution. And I support the EPA.”[68]

* On his campaign website, Johnson described his approach to environmental policy: "We need to stand firm to protect our environment for our future generations, especially those designated areas of protection like our National Parks. Consistent with that responsibility, the proper role of government is to enforce reasonable environmental protections. Governor Johnson did that as Governor, and would do so as President. Governor Johnson believes the Environmental Protection Agency, when focused on its true mission, plays an important role in keeping the environment and citizens safe. Johnson does not, however, believe the government should be engaging in social and economic engineering for the purpose of creating winners and losers in what should be a robust free market. Preventing a polluter from harming our water or air is one thing. Having politicians in Washington, D.C., acting on behalf of high powered lobbyists, determine the future of clean energy innovation is another. ... In a healthy economy that allows the market to function unimpeded, consumers, innovators, and personal choices will do more to bring about environmental protection and restoration than will government regulations driven by special interests. Too often, when Washington, D.C. gets involved, the winners are those with the political clout to write the rules of the game, and the losers are the people and businesses actually trying to innovate. ... Governors Johnson and Weld strongly believe that the federal government should prevent future harm by focusing on regulations that protect us from real harm, rather than needlessly costing American jobs and freedom in order to pursue a political agenda."[69]

* In a video posted to YouTube in March 2012, Gary Johnson said he opposed the Keystone XL pipeline if eminent domain were necessary to establish it. "If the Keystone pipeline is an issue of eminent domain – no, the government should not get involved or I'd have to really have a look at that. If it's rules and regulations that we're talking about, then, yes, rules and regulations can make and should make and I would support making the Keystone XL pipeline happen."[70]

* On his 2012 presidential campaign website, Johnson wrote, "When it comes to the environment, the Federal government’s responsibility is no different than in other aspects of our lives. It is simply to protect us from those who would do us harm and damage our property. There are bad actors who would pollute our water supplies and our air if allowed to do so, and we must have laws and regulations to protect innocent Americans from the harm those bad actors would do. However, common sense must prevail, and the costs of all regulations must be weighed against the benefits. The government should simply stay out of the business of trying to promote or 'manage' energy development. The marketplace will meet our energy needs in the most economical and efficient manner possible – if government will stay out of the way."[71]

* Johnson said he favored nuclear power in an August 2011 interview.[72]

##### Climate change[edit]

* In an interview with the Washington Examiner on July 10, 2016, Johnson commented on the EPA and coal industry, saying, "The role, as far as the Environmental Protection Agency, is to identify health or safety concerns with regard to emissions. I think right now what is happening with climate change, what is happening with the coal industry, is that coal has been bankrupted. It has been bankrupted by the free market. As low as the price of coal is today, natural gas is even lower. So, no new coal plants are going to be built ... Those that exist now are being grandfathered in [under the EPA regulations]. So, coal, the number one contributor to CO2 emissions in the world, is dead. Coal is dead. And the free market did it because we, as consumers, are demanding less carbon emissions."[73]

* In an interview with CNBC on August 22, 2016, Johnson said, "I do think that climate change is occurring, that it is man-caused. One of the proposals that I think is a very libertarian proposal, and I'm just open to this, is taxing carbon emission that may have the result of being self-regulating. ... The market will take care of it. I mean, when you look at it from the standpoint of better results, and actually less money to achieve those results, that's what is being professed by a carbon tax."[74]

* On the questions of climate change and whether or not humans contribute to it, Johnson said on his campaign website: "Is the climate changing? Probably so. Is man contributing to that change? Probably so. But the critical question is whether the politicians’ efforts to regulate, tax and manipulate the private sector are cost-effective – or effective at all."[69]

* Johnson said in a December 2011 interview with NPR that although he believed climate change was human-induced, he did not support cap and trade regulations to lower carbon emissions. He said, "You know, I'm accepting that global warming is man-caused. That said, I am opposed to cap and trade. I think that free-market approach. Hey, we're all demanding less carbon emission. I think we're going to get it."[75]

##### Fracking[edit]

* In November 2011, Johnson said, "I’m going to keep an open mind on fracking.” He continued, saying that "the fact that in Pennsylvania you could turn your faucet on and get water before fracking, and afterwards you could light it — that's a concern. That's a real, live concern.”[76]

* Read more of Gary Johnson's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

The 2016 Libertarian Party Platform on energy and environmental policy

| “  | 2.2 Environment

Competitive free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Governments are unaccountable for damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights and responsibilities regarding resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Where damages can be proven and quantified in a court of law, restitution to the injured parties must be required.

2.3 Energy and Resources

While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production.[20]

| ”

|
|

—2016 Libertarian Party Platform[77]

###  Bill Weld[edit]

* On July 7, 2016, The Washington Post asked Weld if he supported a carbon tax. Weld replied, "No, I think it's an interesting idea, but I'm so indelibly a no-new-taxes guy." The Post also asked how Weld thought the U.S. would meet its carbon emissions obligations under the Paris climate agreement. Weld said, "It could be trading, trading [carbon] credits." Weld acknowledged that this would require setting a price on carbon, but not through a tax.[78]
* During an interview with Gary Johnson and Bill Weld, The Washington Post asked the candidates about eliminating coal use and eventually not burning oil and natural gas in order to address global warming. Weld said, "Five years ago natural gas was everybody's darling because it wasn't oil and it wasn't coal. I'm kind of skeptical that renewables are going to be 75% of the base in terms of electricity by the year 2045. But I think there's a lot we could do. Technology could get us out of this. The missing piece was carbon capture and sequestration: if somebody figured out a way to sequester CO2 in the ocean in a way that was safe and that it wouldn't come back, that would be a breakthrough."[78]
* Read more about Bill Weld.

## Withdrawn candidates[edit]

Democrats

* Lincoln Chafee on energy and environmental policy
* Martin O'Malley on energy and environmental policy
* Bernie Sanders on energy and environmental policy
* Jim Webb on energy and environmental policy

Republicans

* Jeb Bush on energy and environmental policy
* Ben Carson on energy and environmental policy
* Chris Christie on energy and environmental policy
* Ted Cruz on energy and environmental policy
* Carly Fiorina on energy and environmental policy
* Lindsey Graham on energy and environmental policy
* Mike Huckabee on energy and environmental policy
* Bobby Jindal on energy and environmental policy
* John Kasich on energy and environmental policy
* George Pataki on energy and environmental policy
* Rand Paul on energy and environmental policy
* Rick Perry on energy and environmental policy
* Marco Rubio on energy and environmental policy
* Rick Santorum on energy and environmental policy

## Recent news[edit]

This section links to a Google news search for the term 2016 + presidential + candidates + natural + resources

2016 Presidential Candidates on Natural Resources News Feed

## See also[edit]

* Presidential candidates, 2016
* Electoral College

## External links[edit]

* ProCon.org's "Should the United States Authorize the Keystone XL Pipeline to Import Tar Sand Oil from Canada?"
* ProCon.org's "Should the United States Transition Away from Fossil Fuels and Towards Renewable Energy?"
* ProCon.org's "Is Human Activity Primarily Responsible for Global Climate Change?"
* ProCon.org's "Should New Fossil Fuel Leases on Federal Land Be Allowed?"
* ProCon.org's "Should the United States Build Additional Nuclear Power Plants?"
* ProCon.org's "Should Fracking Be Allowed?"

## Footnotes[edit]

1. ↑ The Guardian, "Hillary Clinton on east coast oil drilling: 'So little to gain and so much to lose,'" December 17, 2015
2. ↑ Politico, "Hillary Clinton's climate army," August 11, 2016
3. ↑ The Hill, "Clinton open to ‘conversation’ on carbon tax," July 26, 2016
4. ↑ NextGen Climate, "HUGE NEWS: BERNIE SANDERS JOINS HILLARY CLINTON IN ENDORSING #50BY30," February 9, 2016
5. ↑ Hillary for America: The Briefing, "Hillary Clinton Statement on the Paris Climate Change Agreement," accessed December 14, 2015
6. ↑ TIME, "Hillary Clinton Announces Plan to Protect Coal Communities," November 12, 2015
7. ↑ The Wall Street Journal, "Hillary Clinton Previews Plans to Combat Climate Change," July 26, 2015
8. ↑ YouTube, "Stand for Reality," July 26, 2015
9. ↑ CNN, "First on CNN: Clinton campaign pledges to be carbon neutral, aide says," July 28, 2015
10. ↑ The Hill, "Hillary Clinton: Climate changing 'no matter what deniers may say,'" accessed February 2, 2015
11. ↑ CNN Politics, "Hillary Clinton opposes Keystone XL pipeline," September 22, 2015
12. ↑ USA Today, "Hillary Clinton says she opposes Keystone XL Pipeline," September 22, 2015
13. ↑ Politico, "Hillary Clinton steers clear of Keystone," July 27, 2015
14. ↑ The New York Times, "Transcript: Democratic Presidential Debate in Brooklyn," April 15, 2016
15. ↑ The New York Times, "Transcript of the Democratic Presidential Debate in Flint, Mich.," March 6, 2016
16. ↑ National Journal, "Hillary Clinton: Arctic Drilling 'Not Worth The Risk,'" August 18, 2015
17. ↑ Politico, “Hillary Clinton talks climate change, gas and exports to friendly energy crowd," September 4, 2014
18. ↑ Congress.gov, "S.22 - Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009," accessed February 2, 2015
19. ↑ Congress.gov, "S.Amdt.272 to S.Con.Res.23," accessed February 2, 2015
20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 20.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
21. ↑ Democratic Party, "The 2016 Democratic Party Platform," accessed August 23, 2016
22. ↑ Scientific American, "Tim Kaine's Climate Record Is All over the Map," July 25, 2016
23. ↑ League of Conservation Voters, "National Environmental Scorecard," accessed July 27, 2016
24. ↑ Politico, "Kaine on the issues: Not always taking the party line," July 23, 2016
25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 The Washington Post, "Tim Kaine: Keystone XL pipeline should be stopped," June 20, 2013
26. ↑ YouTube, "Full Speech: Donald Trump Speech at Shale Insight Conference in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (9/22/2016)," September 22, 2016
27. ↑ USA Today, "Donald Trump tells Californians there is no drought," May 28, 2016
28. ↑ The Huffington Post, "Donald Trump Taps Climate Change Skeptic As Key Energy Adviser," May 13, 2016
29. ↑ Twitter, "Donald J. Trump, August 24, 2012," accessed June 18, 2015
30. ↑ Trump, Donald. (2011). Time to Get Tough. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing. (page 24)
31. ↑ Examiner, "Donald Trump: 'Beyond the nuclear' American energy solutions - Full transcript," March 16, 2011
32. ↑ DonaldJTrump.com, "Trump campaign statement on Paris Climate Accord," October 5, 2016
33. ↑ Politico, "Trump adviser denies climate change is manmade," September 27, 2016
34. ↑ Scientific American, "What Do the Presidential Candidates Know about Science?" September 13, 2016
35. ↑ The Guardian, "Donald Trump would allow Keystone XL pipeline and end Paris climate deal," May 26, 2016
36. ↑ Donald Trump for President, "​An America First Energy Plan," May 26, 2016
37. ↑ CNN, "Donald Trump's energy plan: Regulate less, drill more," May 27, 2016
38. ↑ Media Matters, "Fox Regular Donald Trump Decries Climate Change 'Hoax,'" January 6, 2014
39. ↑ Twitter, "Donald J. Trump, November 6, 2012," accessed June 18, 2015
40. ↑ The Federalist, "Trump Boosts Anti-Fracking Measure, Upends Swing State Energy Fight," August 5, 2016
41. ↑ FOX News, "Trump to GOP: Stop playing into President Obama's hands," January 18, 2012
42. ↑ Republican Party, "The 2016 Republican Party Platform," accessed August 23, 2016
43. ↑ Indiana Public Media, "Governor Pence Urges Obama To Approve Keystone XL Pipeline," April 21, 2014
44. ↑ Congress.gov, "H.R.5772," accessed April 2, 2015
45. ↑ 45.0 45.1 Indiana.gov, "SB 340," accessed April 2, 2015
46. ↑ IndyStar.com, "Gov. Pence lets energy program expire without signing bill," accessed April 2, 2015
47. ↑ Congress.gov, "H.R.2454," accessed April 2, 2015
48. ↑ Congress.gov, "H.R.3409," accessed April 2, 2015
49. ↑ Congress.gov, "H.R.2273," accessed April 2, 2015
50. ↑ The Hill, "Jill Stein charged over pipeline protest," September 7, 2016
51. ↑ Fox Business, "Jill Stein: Ending Fossil Fuels Is a 'Tough Job'," August 26, 2016
52. ↑ Twitter, "Dr. Jill Stein," August 11, 2016
53. ↑ Jill Stein for President, "Stein Says Gov. Snyder Should Be Prosecuted For Flint Crisis. Calls for New Water Infrastructure Through A Green New Deal to End Nationwide Drinking Water Crisis," January 24, 2016
54. ↑ The Harvard Crimson, "Harvard Grad Jill Stein Faces Uphill Battle for Presidency," November 29, 2015
55. ↑ Jill 2016, "Power to the People Plan," accessed July 7, 2015
56. ↑ Washington Post, "Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein charged with trespassing in Keystone XL protest," October 31, 2012
57. ↑ 57.0 57.1 57.2 57.3 57.4 Jill Stein for President, "Issues," accessed July 6, 2015
58. ↑ JillStein2016.com, "Press Release: Obama's Carbon Deal Won't Avoid Climate Change," June 28, 2016
59. ↑ TheRealNews.com, "Days of Revolt: The Problem," February 15, 2016
60. ↑ Green Party USA, "Stein: UN Process has failed to save climate: People must act," accessed December 11, 2015
61. ↑ Green Party, "The 2016 Green Party Platform," accessed August 23, 2016
62. ↑ Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 18, 2016
63. ↑ Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 18, 2016
64. ↑ Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," September 30, 2016
65. ↑ Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 7, 2016
66. ↑ Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," September 30, 2016
67. ↑ CNN, "Stein charged with mischief, trespassing after environmental protest," September 7, 2016
68. ↑ NPR, "Libertarian Nominee Gary Johnson Delivers Economic Speech In Detroit," September 14, 2016
69. ↑ 69.0 69.1 JohnsonWeld, "Environment," accessed September 1, 2016
70. ↑ YouTube, "Gary Johnson on Keystone pipeline," March 24, 2012
71. ↑ Gary Johnson 2012, "Environment," accessed January 9, 2016
72. ↑ Scott Holleran, "Interview with Gary Johnson," August 21, 2011
73. ↑ Washington Examiner, "Gary Johnson: I'll cut your taxes," July 10, 2016
74. ↑ CNBC, "Libertarian Gary Johnson on 2016: 'This is the demise of the Republican Party'," August 22, 2016
75. ↑ NPR, "Johnson Discusses Seeking Libertarian Nomination," December 30, 2011
76. ↑ Politico, "Morning Energy," November 18, 2011
77. ↑ Libertarian Party, "The 2016 Libertarian Party Platform," accessed August 23, 2016
78. ↑ 78.0 78.1 The Washington Post, "Listen: Gary Johnson’s full interview with the Washington Post editorial board," July 7, 2016

v • e

2016 United States Presidential Election

Overviews|

2016 presidential election • 2016 presidential candidates • 2016 presidential nominations: calendar and delegate rules • 2016 vice presidential candidates • Possible vice presidential picks

* * *

Candidate profiles|

Hillary Clinton

* * *

Donald Trump

* * *

Jill Stein

* * *

Gary Johnson

* * *

Path to the presidency|

Republican Convention • Republican Primary

* * *

Democratic Convention • Democratic Primary

* * *

Policy positions|

Abortion • Defunding Planned Parenthood • Agricultural subsidies • Black Lives Matter movement • Budgets • Education • Energy and environmental policy • Federal assistance programs • Federalism • Foreign affairs • LGBTQ rights • Government regulations • Healthcare • Immigration • DACA and DAPA • International trade • Rural policy • Taxes

* * *

On the campaign trail|

Ballotpedia's battleground poll • Presidential campaign trackers and opposition researchers

* * *

Campaign staff|

Presidential campaign staff transfers, resignations and terminations • Staff leaks from 2016 presidential campaigns

* * *

Clinton staffers • O'Malley staffers • Sanders staffers

* * *

Bush staffers • Carson staffers • Christie staffers • Cruz staffers • Fiorina staffers • Huckabee staffers • Kasich staffers • Paul staffers • Rubio staffers • Santorum staffers • Trump staffers

* * *

Debates|

PBS, February 11, 2016 (Milwaukee) • PBS, February 4, 2016 (Durham, N.H.) • NBC News, January 17, 2016 (Charleston, S.C.) • ABC, December 19, 2015 (Manchester, N.H.) • CBS, November 14, 2015 (Des Moines) • CNN, October 13, 2015](Las Vegas)

* * *

February 13, 2016 (Greenville, S.C.) • ABC, February 6, 2016 (Manchester, N.H.) • Fox News, January 28, 2016 (Des Moines) • Fox Business, January 14, 2016 (North Charleston, S.C.) • CNN, December 15, 2015 (Las Vegas) • Fox Business, November 10, 2015 (Milwaukee) • CNBC, October 28, 2015 (Boulder) • CNN, September 16, 2015 (Reagan Library) • Fox News, August 6, 2015 (Cleveland)

Analysis|

The media's coverage of Donald Trump • The media's coverage of Hillary Clinton

Post-debate analysis overview
Democratic: April 14, 2016 (CNN) • March 9, 2016 (Univision) • March 6, 2016 (CNN) • February 11, 2016 (PBS) • February 4, 2016 (MSNBC) • January 17, 2016 (NBC) • December 19, 2015 (ABC) • November 14, 2015 (CBS) • October 13, 2015 (CNN)
Republican: March 10, 2016 (CNN) • March 3, 2016 (FNC) • February 25, 2016 (CNN) • February 13, 2016 (CBS) • February 6, 2016 (ABC) • January 28, 2016 (FNC) • January 14, 2016 (FBN) • December 15, 2015 (CNN) • November 10, 2015 (FBN) • October 28, 2015 (CNBC) • September 16, 2015 (CNN)

Insiders Poll: First Democratic debate (October 13, 2015) • Presidential Nominating Index: Clinton remains choice of Democratic Insiders • Presidential Nominating Index: Bush remains choice of Republican Insiders • Insiders Poll: Winners and losers from the Fox News Republican Debate

Ballotpedia

About

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

* * *

Executive: Leslie Graves, Founder and CEO • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer

Communications: Alison Graves, Director of Communications • Carley Allensworth • Abigail Campbell • Sarah Groat • Nathaniel Harwood • Dillon Redmond
External Relations:  Geoff Pallay, Director of External Relations • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Ashley Fleming • Thomas Mardik • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski, Director of Operations • Amanda Herbert • Mandy Morris • Caroline Presnell • Kelly Rindfleisch
Tech: Matt Latourelle, Director of Technology Operations • Ryan Burch • Kirsten Corrao • Beth Dellea • Travis Eden • Tate Kamish • Margaret Kearney • Eric Lotto • Joseph Sanchez • Mary Susmitha

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

* * *

Editorial Content

Josh Altic, Director of Content • Daniel Anderson, Associate Director of Elections & Data • Cory Eucalitto, Associate Director of Features • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor of Ballot Measures • Mandy McConnell, Managing Editor of News • Doug Kronaizl, Managing Editor of Local Expansion • Abbey Smith, Managing Editor of Elections • Janie Valentine, Managing Editor of Law • Joel Williams, Managing Editor of Events • Joseph Greaney, Managing Editor of Policy • Andrew Bahl • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Jon Dunn • Victoria Edwards • Thomas Ellis • Nicole Fisher • Thomas Grobben • Brianna Hosea • Molly Kehoe • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Nathan Maxwell • Jimmy McAllister • Brandon McCauley • Andrew McNair • Ellie Mikus • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Annelise Reinwald • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Emma Soukup • Alexis Thacker • Mina Vogel • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox