Which 2020 Democrats Are Strongest on Climate? Here’s the List.

Meanwhile, the White House continues its anti-environmental agenda.

Gabriele Holtermann Gorden/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images

This story was originally published by HuffPost. It appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Climate change is already a major campaign issue for the many Democrats running to replace President Donald Trump in 2020. But while some candidates have expressed support for the ambitious Green New Deal or pledged to reject fossil fuel money, others have called the legislation “unachievable” or left the door open to Big Oil.

The environmental group 350 Action on Wednesday released a candidate scorecard known as the 2020 Climate Test to assess presidential hopefuls on three major metrics: support for a Green New Deal, opposition to new fossil fuel development and refusal to accept money from energy companies. (Trump is the only Republican listed, as no other members of his party have announced a bid to unseat him. He failed all three tests.)

“We’re making it clear where 2020 candidates land on the policies and practices essential to any meaningful attempt at addressing the climate crisis,” May Boeve, 350 Action’s executive director, said in a statement. “Bold climate action that strengthens our economy and communities is not only what most Americans want—it’s also the reasonable and responsible way forward.”

Recent polls show the issue is growing as a national concern. A Gallup poll this month found that a majority of Americans identify as “concerned believers” who are highly worried about climate change and believe it will pose a serious threat in their lifetimes. Other polling suggests public concern about climate change has increased since Trump took office and moved to unravel many landmark environmental policies and withdraw the country from the Paris climate deal.

Julian NoiseCat, a policy analyst at 350 Action, said the group is working to dispel any idea that climate action is unpopular or a fringe issue.

“The impacts of climate change are upon us. Full stop,” NoiseCat told HuffPost in an email. “All the data shows that Americans are increasingly concerned about climate change and looking to new leaders for meaningful action. Candidates who inspire the public about the promise of a green economy and the imperative to take-on the fossil fuel corporations polluting our planet and our democracy are going to stand out.” (NoiseCat was formerly a fellow at HuffPost.)

Despite public sentiment, Trump and his administration have maintained a firm anti-environment agenda. The president regularly mocks the idea of climate change on Twitter, and the White House is planning to set up a panel devoted to challenging the science behind the phenomenon that includes an avowed climate skeptic.

But on the Democratic side, 2020 candidates have for the most part indicated support for environmental policies, though some appear more willing to acknowledge the seriousness of the situation than others. Here’s how the Democratic field pans out so far, per 350 Action’s scorecard.

The standouts.

Three candidates have made firm climate-forward commitments, issuing their support for the Green New Deal, vowing to keep fossil fuels in the ground and banning donations from Big Oil.

  • Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.)
  • Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.)
  • Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.)

They’re getting there.

Four candidates have supported two of 350 Action’s three benchmarks.

  • Sen. Cory Booker (N.J.)—Supports a Green New Deal and keeping fossil fuels in the ground.
  • Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii)—Supports keeping fossil fuels in the ground and ending donations from the energy industry.
  • Gov. Jay Inslee (Wash.)—Supports a Green New Deal and ending donations from the energy industry.
  • Andrew Yang—Supports a Green New Deal and ending donations from the energy industry.

We need to know more.

Five candidates have expressed firm pro-environment views, but we need to know more about their positions.

  • Mayor Pete Buttigieg (South Bend, Ind.)—Supports the Green New Deal.
  • Former HUD Secretary Julian Castro—Supports the Green New Deal.
  • Sen. Kamala Harris (Calif.)—Supports the Green New Deal.
  • Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.)—Supports the Green New Deal.
  • Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (Texas)—Supports the Green New Deal.

Not doing so hot.

Two candidates have failed all three of 350 Action’s tests, attacking the Green New Deal or making no firm pledges to work against fossil fuel companies.

  • Former Rep. John Delaney (Md.)—Does not support the Green New Deal.
  • Former Gov. John Hickenlooper (Colo.)—Does not support the Green New Deal.
More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate