The Climate Debate: Health Care All Over Again?

Anyone who's cringing at what's been happening in the town halls on health care won't feel any better after reading this post in the Wall Street Journal's Environmental Capital blog on groups mobilizing over the climate bill – using the health care fracas as a model.

Don't get us wrong – there's absolutely nothing wrong with mobilizing for or against any legislation, on any topic. And since Congressional town halls are classically an August phenomenon, we'll be spared some of the live theatre when Congress takes up the issue again this fall.

But the debate on the sweeping climate change bill poses at least as much potential to get out of hand as health care, for three reasons:

The debate is just as complicated. At least there's an actual climate bill that's been passed by the House, unlike health care, where there are still multiple competing proposals being worked out in committee. But the bill itself is more than 1,000 pages. In fact, the Congressional Research Service summary of the bill, designed for legislators and their staff members, clocks in at more than 150 pages. And, to make things even more difficult, the centerpiece of the bill is a "cap-and-trade" system, which is not the easiest thing to explain to begin with.

 

The public has a hazy grasp of key facts. We're not talking about whether global warming is real or not, although there are people who don't buy that it's real. We're talking about even more basic information. Public Agenda's Energy Learning Curve™ survey found that four in 10 Americans can't name a fossil fuel. Nearly half can't name a renewable energy source. Survey questions about energy or global warming have disturbingly high levels of "don’t know" answers.

Surveys show majorities of the public support taking action on global warming and energy policy, and several surveys show majorities favor cap-and-trade. That support bounces around, however, depending on how the questions are worded. And even among energy issues, global warming is behind energy prices and energy security as public concerns.

 

The public's not getting what they need to wrestle with this issue. On health care, one of the biggest problems seems to be that people don't have basic facts and clear options. Without facts, you can't judge what's real and what's not. Without options, presented clearly and fairly, you can't decide what you're willing to sacrifice for change and what's a dealbreaker.

Sounds a lot like health care, doesn't it? And unless leaders embrace a different kind of discussion, the climate bill debate may turn out just as ugly.