With just 365 days until the 2008 US presidential election, I suggest it is time to start thinking about who will be represent you. The League of Conservation (not Conservative) Voters has assembled a great summary of the 2008 presidential candidates. They track people's green scores based on a variety of important environmental concerns. Obama is currently ranked first with a score of 96% (over 2 years), while Kucinich is second with 92% (since 2001), and Hillary in third with 90%. Some candidates have not responded... I don't wonder why.Thomas Friedman of the NY Times proclaims that the best "green" thing you can do is elect the right people. He lambastes Bush by saying:
Have no illusions, everything George Bush wouldn’t do on energy after 9/11 — his resisting improved mileage for cars and actually trying to weaken air-conditioner standards — swamped any good works you did.
Don't that stop you from using fewer plastic bags and sending eco-friendly gifts. Just take that as food for thought next time you rock the vote.
Thanks for the idea, Sarah!
Image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Uscapitolindaylight.jpg
1 comment:
Aww, you're welcome! I don't remember suggesting it, but it sounds like something I might have--and I'm excited to check out the link on the 2008 candidates!! Nice to have a comprehsive listing and one that shows just how "green" they claim to be :)
Post a Comment