This Is What Happened at the First Presidential Environmental Justice Forum

Booker and Warren ruled.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and moderators Mustafa Ali and Amy Goodman at the South Carolina State University environmental justice presidential forum.Sean Rayford/Stringer/Getty

This story was originally published by The Guardian and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Only six candidates turned out for the first ever presidential forum on environmental justice at South Carolina State University on Friday night.

Issues such as lead-contaminated water, food deserts, childhood asthma and proximity to polluting chemical plants and industrial pig farms disproportionately affect low-income communities, tribal nations and people of colour.

The Democratic candidates who participated were Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.); former members of Congress John Delaney and Joe Sestak; the billionaire Tom Steyer; and the author Marianne Williamson.

Warren, who launched an ambitious climate and environmental justice plan last month, said a third of the $3tn she has pledged to spend combating global heating over the next decade would be ring fenced for communities devastated by generations of environmental racism.

She pledged to tackle big corporations including big polluters by introducing anti-corruption legislation on her first day as president.

Asked about Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg’s recently leaked comment that a Warren presidency would “suck” for the company, she responded: “Boo-hoo.”

Steyer, the hedge-fund manager turned environmental philanthropist who bankrolled an “impeach Trump” ad campaign, said he would declare a state of emergency on his first day in office to tackle the climate crisis.

He compared current environmental inequalities to Jim Crow segregation laws implemented after the abolition of slavery, when people of color and native Americans had inadequate and inferior public services.

“If we’re going to repair these injustices, the people affected have to be at the front of the line for green jobs,” said Steyer.

The Flint water scandal in 2014 propelled environmental inequalities on to the national stage. Since then, it has emerged that thousands of water sources in communities across the US are contaminated with lead. This includes Newark, New Jersey, where Booker was mayor. He pledged to fund a national programme to replace lead pipes.

The New Jersey senator, who founded the first environmental justice caucus, is vegan, because of what he says to the cruel and polluting “corporate animal industry” responsible for massive greenhouse gas emissions and health problems in nearby communities.

Booker defended supporting nuclear power, a position criticized by environmental justice groups given the health risks posed by nuclear waste, arguing that it was the only way to meet climate targets within 12 years.

“Fifty percent of our non-carbon energy producing capacity come from nuclear,” he said. “So I’m a realist.”

Delaney, a former congressman from Maryland, said cutting carbon emissions to net zero by 2050 would be impossible under the Green New Deal, a broad social and economic pact supported by high-profile Democrats such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The deal plans legislation to achieve universal healthcare and higher minimum wages as well as clean energy, sustainable infrastructure and green jobs.

Delaney said he wants to cancel fossil-fuel tax subsidies, freeing up money to invest in technology to sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

The environmental justice forum was hosted by the National Black Caucus of State Legislators and leaders from frontline and tribal communities, civil rights, youth and environmental organizations.

It was moderated by Mustafa Santiago Ali, a former Environmental Protection Agency official, and Amy Goodman from the independent news organization Democracy Now.

The caucus will host a forum on gun violence and mental health next month.

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