With the end of the Maryland General Assembly Session, and the primaries just around the corner, politicians are scrambling in earnest to get their campaigns for office in high gear. We have many exciting races, from Cheryl Kagan and Roger Manno running for Senate in Montgomery County, to exciting races for state Delegate. The District of Columbia also will have a heated primary at the Mayoral and Council levels. We can expect the candidates to tout their environmental, or "green" credentials, whether they are first time candidates or running for re-election. It is the responsibility of each of us to fully understand the truth behind the green claims made by the candidates.

Many green-minded voters look at two things when deciding on a candidate - endorsements by green organizations (CCAN, Sierra Club, LCV), and, if they are an incumbent, their League of Conservation Voters (LCV) scorecard. Unfortunately, if you don't know the context of these items, they can possibly mislead you about the environmental credentials of a candidate.

Endorsements - I have had the honor of participating in the process of environmental endorsements in Maryland. I know it's a serious, tough process. There is a lot of weight given to incumbency. Basically, if an incumbent has a good record (ie. good LCV scorecard), he/she will likely get the endorsement, even if the challenger is an incredible grassroots environmental activist. It makes sense. You want to be able to reward people for voting the right way on environmental issues. However, as a voter, you don't have to do that. You can vote for the candidate that you think will be best on the environment, regardless of whether one is the incumbent or not.

Additionally, the issues that determine if someone is "good" on the environment or not are kind of subjective. In other words, unless someone is good on every single issue, and by the way - those issues did not have opposing viewpoints within the environmental community, the people who decide endorsements must weigh which issues count more than others. There are a host of environmental issues, from climate change, to clean energy, air pollution, stormwater management, water quality, toxins, land use, etc.

LCV Scorecard - The scorecard, like the endorsements is also somewhat subjective. Because I've walked the halls of Annapolis, I know that someone can have a 90% or even a 100% voting record and not be worth voting for. How is that? Because not all votes are the same. There are "easy" votes and "hard" votes. For example, the Democrats are a large majority in both the Maryland House and Senate. If you are a Democratic official, and your leadership in the House or Senate supports a bill, and it gets out of committee, it is not that hard of a vote to take in support of the bill. If you're from Montgomery County, it's even easier. In Maryland, the harder votes tend to come in committee, where bills live or die. Typically, if a bill gets out of committee, it passes the full chamber.

LCV does not score every environmental bill that comes up for a vote, either. It only scores the one that a handful of environmental groups have agreed are worthy of scoring. Again, if there is some disagreement about a bill, it usually will not get scored.

The point I'm making is that I support the environmental endorsement process, and I think the LCV scorecard is very useful. But to be an educated environmental voter, you need to look further in depth into the process. You need to figure out what were the truly hard votes and which were easy. You need to determine which candidate demonstrates leadership and not just voting the right way. It's a lot of work, but then again, the environment is worth it.

Clean Currents will be keeping track of the races in our neck of the woods - mainly Montgomery County. We will be happy to let you know which candidates truly support green energy and green jobs, and which ones don't. Stay tuned.

To read the article from its source, click here.