Some people I know who seem pretty “with it” seem to have some sort of misguided love affair with John McCain. They think he is just liberal enough, or just “maverick” enough to keep from making the same horrific mistakes that Bush has for the last 8 years. Well I wont bother to go into gritty detail about how they are wrong, but I will do my best to convince you that McCain is no friend of the environment (and the billions of humans who rely on that environment). And thats just it, if you are not a strong supporter of the environment, you aren’t a strong support of the humans that depend on that environment for life. I highly suggest you read all of the linked articles below as they are all pretty good.

First up The New Republic.

Nowadays, any Republican running for president needs one liberal issue he can point to as proof that he is not the scary sort of conservative. In 2000, George Bush had education. For John McCain in the months ahead, that issue may well be the environment.
…
his lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters is a dismal 24 percent, and he’s generally more likely to side with miners, developers, and loggers than the EPA.
…
Trying to explain McCain’s wildly erratic record on environmental issues is a maddening task. “We never know where he’s going to come from,” says Debbie Sease, the legislative director of the Sierra Club.
…
McCain usually held the conservative line, voting to hollow out clean-water and health protections or to expand offshore drilling. He also famously agitated for the construction of a controversial telescope atop Arizona’s Mount Graham–which meant the razing of a forest containing an endangered species of red squirrel. When a Forest Service supervisor wanted to halt work on a road into the area, McCain was livid, according to a later investigation, threatening that, “if he did not cooperate on this project, he would be the shortest tenured forest supervisor in the history of the Forest Service.”

The New York Times:

Senator John McCain likes to present himself as the candidate of the “Straight Talk Express” who does not pander to voters or change his positions with the political breeze. But the fine print of his record in the Senate indicates that he has been a lot less consistent on some of his signature issues than he has presented himself to be so far in his presidential campaign.

And Grist

Does John McCain have that kind of deep understanding and commitment? If elected, will he be the climate champion we so desperately need?

Conventional wisdom says yes. The media touts McCain’s stance on climate as evidence of his straight-talkin’ maverickosity.
…
his is a classic case of what our president calls the soft bigotry of low expectations. Judged against his fellow Republicans, McCain is a paragon of atmospheric wisdom. Judged against the climate and energy legislation afoot in Congress, he falls short. Judged against the two leading Democratic presidential candidates, he is a pale shadow. Judged against the imperatives of climate science — that is to say, judged against brute physical reality — he isn’t even in the ballpark.

It’s time to stop grading McCain on a curve.

McCain’s green bona fides, as far as I can tell, boil down to three things:

* He voted against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and has sponsored or cosponsored the occasional, modest environmental protection bill (protecting whales; awarding tax credits for energy efficiency; boosting fuel efficiency). (Note, however, that his lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters is a measly 29 percent.)
* In 2003, he and Sen. Joe Lieberman introduced the first-ever climate bill to the Senate: the Climate Stewardship Act, which would establish a carbon cap-and-trade system to reduce U.S. emissions. It was introduced and voted down in 2003 and again in 2005.
* He acknowledges, without hedging, that anthropogenic climate change is real, and speaks eloquently about the need to address it. He has frequently criticized the Bush administration for inaction.

These aren’t chopped liver. All were acts of courage undertaken in a time of Republican majority, when they offered little political reward (other than the undying love of cable news talk-show hosts). The second, in particular, was a beacon of hope for greens in a time when there were very few.

Nonetheless, we must assess these acts in light of what has come after, and the political environment we find ourselves in today.
…
He has gone AWOL:

* On June 21, 2007, the Senate voted on the Baucus amendment to the energy bill, which would have removed some oil company subsidies in order to fund renewable energy. The amendment failed to pass. Where was McCain? He didn’t vote.
* On the same day, the Senate held a cloture vote to overcome the standard Republican veto threat and pass the energy bill. The vote succeeded. Where was McCain? He didn’t vote.
* On Dec. 7, the Senate held another cloture vote to overcome the standard Republican veto threat on the energy bill, which had become substantially bolder after being aligned with the House version. The vote failed. Where was McCain? He didn’t vote.
* On Dec. 13, 2007, the Senate held another cloture vote to overcome the standard Republican veto threat and pass the energy bill, which had the Renewable Portfolio Standard stripped out of it but retained a measure that would shift oil company subsidies to renewables. The vote failed — by one vote, 59-40. Where was McCain? He didn’t vote — the only senator not to do so.
* On Feb. 6, 2008, the Senate held another cloture vote to overcome the standard Republican veto threat and pass a stimulus bill containing a number of green energy incentives. The cloture motion failed, by one vote. Where was McCain? He didn’t vote — again, the only senator not to do so.

In short it seems that McCain is just not maverick enough. He isn’t consistent, he isn’t willing to really push the envelope, he isn’t really willing to make the choices needed to keep our environment healthy enough to support our healthy living.