Hero or Zero?

McCain gets a zero from League of Conservation Voters; Obama and Clinton score better

Posted at 11:47 AM on 21 Feb 2008

Republican presidential candidate John McCain got a score of zero from the League of Conservation Voters for his voting record on environmental issues in Congress in 2007 -- not because he voted against environmental protections, but because he simply didn't show up to vote. McCain missed all 15 of the Senate votes that LCV counted in compiling its annual congressional scorecard, the only member of Congress with such a dismal attendance record. All of the presidential candidates who are currently serving in Congress took hits to their scores due to campaigning that often kept them from environmental votes, but McCain did worse than the other front-runners. (In fact, McCain earned an even lower score than some members of Congress who had terminal illnesses or died during the session. Read more about McCain's missed votes and environmental record.) Overall, McCain's lifetime score from LCV is 24 percent. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton edged out Barack Obama with 73 percent for 2007 compared to Obama's 67; the average across Congress in 2007 was 53 percent. LCV gives Clinton an 87 percent for her whole Senate career, barely ahead of Obama's lifetime score of 86 percent.

sources: Reuters
straight to the scorecard: 2007 National Environmental Scorecard

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (5 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Kelly Monteiths of Journalism

The Lib Hit Squad is in full force on McCain now that the Clinton Coronation has beens scuttled.

A Moderate Republican has Dems quaking in their boots. Keep hurling your...um..."mud" at JC...it won't stick!

Texeme.Construct(Participant)

by jabailo at 7:26 PM on 21 Feb 2008

Um... What?!

How exactly is reporting the FACT that he was amazingly absent for EVERY piece of environmental legislation (and in one case the ONLY person absent!) "mudslinging?"

I could understand the accusation if people were criticizing HOW he voted or WHY he voted for something, but these people are just stating that he DIDN'T vote and therefore can't receive a score one way or the other.

I admit to having an elected official (who's sole job requirement is to represent the people) that doesn't vote is worrisome to me, but I can't see how the "Lib Hit Squad" is being vicious by pointing out what is public record. Pretty hard to make that stuff up, ya know.

If you continue to do what you've always done you'll continue to get what you've always got. - Yogi Berra

by Matt at 6:17 AM on 22 Feb 2008

League Of Conservation Voters Scorecard

First, it must be realized that the League of Conservation Voters is a very conservative environmental group. Additionally, really good environmental legislation has not been voted on in Congress in decades, and this scorecard only measures votes while totally ignoring everything else about a candidate's environmental behavior (what legislation did the candidate promote, did the candidate take a leading role in "good" environmental legislation, etc.). Therefore, only a high score shows that a candidate has good environmental credentials.

Any score below 90 raises serious concerns, and a candidate with a score below 80 is one who should not be supported. This card shows who's bad, not who's good, which is hardly anyone in Congress. Use the scorecard as a starting point, not to make a decision. The conclusion to be drawn from all this is that neither Hillary Clinton nor Barak Obama deserve the support of the environmental community (for 2007, Clinton 73 and Obama 67).

As to John McCain, he's always been a hardcore anti-environmentalist and a war monger. John Bailo's calling him a moderate defines Bailo as a fascist. No real environmentalist would even think of voting for McCain, even if (s)he wanted to vote "pragmatically," which is problematic but is another issue.

by Wolverine at 12:57 PM on 22 Feb 2008

I Won't Vote .....

In the presidential election this year. I want have either of the present front candidates of either party on my conscience.

The fact that the 3 front running clowns could actually be presidential candidates shows how far we have fallen ...... Nero fiddles while Rome burns.

The American people should refuse to participate in the farce presented to them by not voting.

No govt can claim a mandate if less than 50% of the people vote and even lower percentages would expose the failure that the two party system has become.

Apart from such a maneuver, only the actions of 1776 will undo the present America of 1984.

"We Have Found the Enemy and It Is Us" ... Pogo

by rrecroc at 3:32 PM on 22 Feb 2008

Attack on McCain is Shameful

Missed votes due to campaign demands are in no way an indicator of Senator McCain's environmental positions or record. To imply that they are is deceitful.

On many of the issues rated by the LCV scorecard, Senator McCain has made his position clear. In fact, LCV rated a vote on an amendment reforming the U.S Army Corps of Engineers. This amendment echoes McCain's own Corps reform legislation, yet he was penalized for missing the vote as much as Senator Barack Obama was penalized for voting against the amendment. Is that fair?

Sierra Club's disgraceful attacks ignore that Senator McCain has exhibited more leadership on addressing climate change than either Senator Obama or Senator Clinton. McCain's leadership and persistence has moved Congress closer to adopting firm limits on greenhouse gas emissions.

Since 2003, McCain has been introducing and securing votes on his strong cap-and-trade bill, the Climate Stewardship Act. He also educated his colleagues--from both sides of the aisle--about the need for a strong climate bill. He has taken fellow members of Congress to the far ends of the earth to build support for addressing climate change.

Sierra Club's statement about the LCV score accused Senator McCain of having a "lifetime record of voting with polluters and special interests." Nothing could be further from the truth.

Sierra Club's vicious partisan attacks against a GOP nominee for president who posseses the conservation and stewardship ethic of Theodore Roosevelt is shameful.

The statement validates the suspicion that the Club's partisan loyalties trump its mission of non-partisan environmental advocacy.

by alaskaluv at 9:50 PM on 22 Feb 2008

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?