America Is the Next Virginia

Often held up as a bellwether for red states shifting blue, Virginia’s as good a test case as any for the changing politics of coal.

National Journal
Lucia Graves
May 30, 2014, 6:24 a.m.

No soon­er did word spread that Pres­id­ent Obama would use his ex­ec­ut­ive au­thor­ity to cut car­bon emis­sions from the coun­try’s coal-fired power plants than the politick­ing began.

The U.S. Cham­ber of Com­merce pub­lished a scath­ing re­port. The En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency fired back. Politico doc­u­mented the spat. Lath­er, rinse, re­peat.

With Obama­care’s woes ap­par­ently solved for the mo­ment, and the Benghazi scan­dal feel­ing in­creas­ingly ab­struse, con­ser­vat­ives are look­ing for a new point of con­flag­ra­tion in the run-up to elec­tions this fall — and the new EPA reg­u­la­tions on car­bon emis­sions from ex­ist­ing power plants, to be re­leased on Monday, look like prom­ising fod­der.

The new cli­mate reg­u­la­tions, as New York magazine’s Jonath­an Chait ob­served, of­fer few ob­vi­ous tan­gible selling points for Demo­crats. In­stead, the reg­u­la­tions could mean the loss of jobs and the decim­a­tion of whole towns where live­li­hoods de­pend on the coal in­dustry, as well as high­er en­ergy costs for av­er­age Amer­ic­ans. Re­pub­lic­ans hope to make these con­sequences an al­batross around Demo­crats’ necks this year.

And yet there’s good reas­on to think the dooms­day elect­or­al pre­dic­tions are wrong — that Obama’s coal-fired power-plant reg­u­la­tions, while he’s painted them as a “mor­al ob­lig­a­tion,” are not in fact some sort of polit­ic­al hara-kiri ahead of elec­tions in 2014. To un­der­stand why, con­sider the Vir­gin­ia gov­ernor’s race.

While its re­li­ance on coal for power gen­er­a­tion is lower than some oth­er states, Vir­gin­ia ranks 14th in the coun­try for coal pro­duc­tion. And the sur­round­ing coal in­dustry has tra­di­tion­ally played no small role in shap­ing the state’s polit­ic­al land­scape. That’s chan­ging though, and last year’s gov­ernor’s race between Demo­crat Terry McAul­iffe and Re­pub­lic­an Ken Cuc­cinelli shows why.

The back­drop should sound fa­mil­i­ar: In Septem­ber of 2013, Obama had just rolled out a sep­ar­ate pre­lim­in­ary reg­u­la­tion re­strict­ing green­house-gas emis­sions for fu­ture coal-fired power plants. The back­lash from the coal in­dustry was in­tense, and Cuc­cinelli was quick use it to his ad­vant­age.

“Barack Obama’s war on coal is in­tensi­fy­ing,” said a voice one Cuc­cinelli at­tack ad. “McAul­iffe would side with Obama and kill Vir­gin­ia coal, Vir­gin­ia jobs.”

McAul­iffe re­spon­ded by doub­ling down on his en­vir­on­ment­al po­s­i­tions. He sup­por­ted the reg­u­la­tions, while be­ing care­ful to not ap­pear overly ant­ag­on­ist­ic to­ward coal. “Vir­gin­ia needs to seize the op­por­tun­ity to de­vel­op and de­ploy clean­er en­ergy tech­no­lo­gies that will grow our eco­nomy while pro­tect­ing our en­vir­on­ment,” he wrote in a Politico op-ed. “Just as lim­its were pre­vi­ously set on mer­cury, ar­sen­ic, and lead pol­lu­tion, it’s time to place com­mon­sense lim­its on car­bon pol­lu­tion. And Vir­gini­ans agree with me.”

And so they did. Not only did McAul­iffe win, but he won on en­vir­on­ment­al is­sues. In a Wash­ing­ton Post poll pub­lished in the days lead­ing up to the elec­tion, he held an 8-point lead on en­ergy and en­vir­on­ment­al is­sues spe­cific­ally.

So how did a guy whose third-largest donor was the League of Con­ser­va­tion Voters (and whose fourth-largest was Tom Stey­er), win in a coal state? Vir­gin­ia has a bit of a com­plic­ated re­la­tion­ship with cli­mate polit­ics — Nor­folk, in par­tic­u­lar, is among the U.S. cit­ies most threatened by sea-level rise, ac­cord­ing to the U.S. Geo­lo­gic­al Sur­vey. And McAul­iffe’s statewide ad cam­paign tar­get­ing his op­pon­ent’s cli­mate-change deni­al did not fall on deaf ears. Neither did his full-throated de­fense of noted cli­mate sci­ent­ist Mi­chael Mann, then at the Uni­versity of Vir­gin­ia.

Of course, the situ­ation for na­tion­al Demo­crats isn’t com­pletely ana­log­ous to what McAul­iffe ex­per­i­enced. Obama’s ex­pec­ted car­bon an­nounce­ment doesn’t just con­cern fu­ture power plants: It will have very real con­sequences for ex­ist­ing ones. And his pledge to cut car­bon emis­sions by 20 per­cent could even­tu­ally shut down hun­dreds of coal-fired power plants around the coun­try.

But it’s also, as one Demo­crat­ic strategist noted to The Wash­ing­ton Post‘s Greg Sar­gent, an op­por­tun­ity for Demo­crats to draw a con­trast with a pres­id­ent who’s widely un­pop­u­lar right now. “I’m not sure at the end of the day wheth­er people in those states are likely to say, ‘This shows Demo­crats are try­ing to screw us,’ or, ‘I’m glad my Demo­crat is stand­ing up for me, and he will do oth­er valu­able things.’ Where this really nets out is hard to know. But we’ve been deal­ing with the ba­sic them­at­ics here for a long time.”

Mean­while, McAul­iffe’s suc­cess shows that em­bra­cing cli­mate reg­u­la­tions could be a win­ner for oth­er Demo­crats, too.

What We're Following See More »
SHARES THEIR LOVE STORY
Bill Clinton Gets Personal in Convention Speech
8 hours ago
THE DETAILS

“In the spring of 1971, I met a girl,” started Bill Clinton. In his speech Tuesday night at the Democratic National Convention, Clinton brought a personal touch, telling parallel stories of his relationship with Hillary Clinton and the work she has done throughout her career. He lauded the Democratic nominee for her career of work, touching on her earliest days of advocacy for children and those with disabilities while in law school, her role as Secretary of State, and her work in raising their daughter, Chelsea. Providing a number of anecdotes throughout the speech, Clinton built to a crescendo, imploring the audience to support his wife for president. "You should elect her, she'll never quit when the going gets tough," he said. "Your children and grandchildren will be grateful."

LOUD “BLACK LIVES MATTER” CHANTS RING OUT
Mothers Of The Movement Endorse Hillary Clinton
11 hours ago
THE DETAILS

A coalition of mothers whose children lost their lives in high profile cases across the country, known as the Mothers Of The Movement, were greeted with deafening chants of "Black Lives Matter" before telling their stories. The mothers of Sandra Bland, Jordan Davis, and Trayvon Martin spoke for the group, soliciting both tears and applause from the crowd. "Hillary Clinton has the compassion and understanding to comfort a grieving mother," said Sybrina Fulton, the mother of Trayvon Martin. "And that's why, in the memory of our children, we are imploring you — all of you — to vote this election day."

SOUTH DAKOTA GIVES HER CLINCHING DELEGATES
Clinton Officially Democratic Nominee for President
13 hours ago
THE DETAILS

With the South Dakota delegation announcing its delegate count, Hillary Rodham Clinton is officially the Democratic nominee for president, surpassing the 2383 delegates needed to clinch the nomination. Clinton is expected to speak at the convention on Thursday night and officially accept the nomination.

THE QUESTION
How Many People Protested in Philly Yesterday?
17 hours ago
THE ANSWER

About 5,500, according to official estimates. "The Monday figures marked a large increase from the protests at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, where even the largest protests only drew a couple of hundred demonstrators. But it’s a far cry from the 35,000 to 50,000 that Philadelphia city officials initially expected."

Source:
NO BATTLEGROUND STATES LEAN TRUMP
NY Times’ Upshot Gives Clinton 68% Chance to Win
17 hours ago
THE LATEST

Only a day after FiveThirtyEight's Now Cast gave Donald Trump a 57% chance of winning, the New York Times' Upshot fires back with its own analysis that shows Hillary Clinton with a 68% chance to be the next president. Its model "calculates win probabilities for each state," which incorporate recent polls plus "a state's past election results and national polling." Notably, all of the battleground states that "vote like the country as a whole" either lean toward Clinton or are toss-ups. None lean toward Trump.

Source:
×