Environment column

Climate change debate between College Democrats, Republicans contentious, but not substantive

Talia Trackim | Digital Presentation Director

Climate change was the most contentious topic of discussion at the debate held between Syracuse University’s College Democrats and Republicans on Thursday night. It was also the least substantive.

After two relatively calm subjects, income inequality and free speech, climate change finally interrupted the civility between the Democrats and Republicans. The debaters raised their voices, jumped out of chairs, dismissed and mocked each other.

In the midst of the fire, though, there was not enough oxygen to sustain serious policy solutions.

Following the debate, Tighe Gugerty, a sophomore Arts and Sciences student said that climate change is, “a problem that we know is unequivocally happening, so what needs to be done is to choose a path to fix it.”

Both the Democrats and Republicans acknowledged that the chaos surrounding climate change and related policy is a threat to humanity. But, neither side proposed the far-reaching policy that we need to combat it. The Democrats argued for government investments in clean energy, efficient infrastructure and sustainable agriculture. And the Republicans pressed for more nuclear energy, corporate research and development and in general American capitalistic entrepreneurialism.



The problem is those ideas aren’t enough to prevent a climate catastrophe. Solutions to the pressing environmental problems we face will require massive mobilization at every level of government, business and society.

Both sides’ solutions were half-baked, at best.

Climate change is not a problem for one “side” to solve. No single group will be able to pull the sword from the stone — not Democrats or Republicans, not consumers or corporations, not lawmakers or bureaucrats. Government policy without private innovation will not do enough. Private innovation without government policy will do even less.

Fighting climate change must be an American effort. We have to pursue every point of attack in our fight against climate change, not just one.

And the next time tempers flare at a college debate, we would all be well-served to pause and realize that climate change, unlike economic inequality or free speech, is no place for picking sides.

Noah Goldmann is a sophomore mathematics major and political science and music performance minor. His column appears every other week. He can be reached at nggoldma@syr.edu.

ch





Top Stories