what i have learned since moving to seattle is that what i witnessed is not new and it is throughout the city. film director christopher rufo aggregated data on homeless encampments and their hazards, such as trash, feces, and used needles, on to one map. the data points show that residents in every single neighborhood have seen sights like the ones that i have seen: large homeless encampments near freeways, people living in broken down rvs in front of people’s houses, and people sleeping in business entryways.

seattle now has a humanitarian crisis, with more than 11,000 individuals experiencing homelessness in january 2019. this crisis is front and center in the city council elections. major flashpoints in the elections include the approval and subsequent quick repeal of the seattle head tax and komo news report, “seattle is dying,” an inflammatory piece focusing on a failing criminal justice system.

homelessness and what the city can do to solve it is on the minds of voters in this year’s city council election, in which seven of the nine seats are on the ballot. district 3, where i happen to reside, has been labeled the most competitive and is the most expensive. councilwoman kshama sawant, the socialist alternative incumbent, is the most vulnerable to lose her seat to the now five candidates hoping to unseat her. this district will show if seattle wants to keep moving forward with progressive policies and with divisive leaders, or to change course and focus on more pragmatic progressive solutions.

one of the challengers, ami nguyen, is a king county public defender and the daughter of vietnamese refugees. her ideas and beliefs are formed by her experience as a child where her family “…relied on government benefits like subsidized housing, food stamps, public schools, and school lunches,” ngyuen told me. and because of this she believes that “…it is important for a city councilmember to understand the importance of those programs.”

that is the message that nguyen is telling the voters. she understands the plight of low income people in the district because as a child she lived in poverty, and as an adult she helps those living in poverty as a public defender. this message is resonating with voters, as shown by the fact that she has received over $57,000 from the city’s democracy vouchers program, the most for any candidate in her district.

when asked about her policies and positions on how to handle the homelessness crisis she said that there needs to be a mix of affordable housing and supportive housing.

“we just can’t only build low income and affordable housing, or only build supportive housing, because we are limited in money,” nguyen said. “with the private companies they’re building affordable housing, and they’re (being built) faster. supportive housing will cost more. but a lot of nonprofits in the city are capable of it.”

supportive housing not only focuses on housing people, but provides services such as addiction and mental health treatment, to deal with the underlying  causes of homelessness. nguyen said, “i think that it’s a great way to make sure that people are not only housed, but they stay housed.”

when it comes to the environmental impact of homelessness, nguyen focused on the feces outside. “… if you are having feces (on the ground) then it not only affects the soil for the community long term, but also short term because they (homeless people) are sleeping right next to it. there are potential diseases that can make them sick.

“give people access to bathrooms. we don’t have enough,” she said. “if you don’t provide enough then people are going to use the restroom in public and it’s going to have that environmental impact and also that health and safety impact.”

nguyen is correct. diseases that are transmitted through human waste include hepatitis, meningitis, and typhus and all of these diseases are found in homeless encampments in san francisco, los angeles, and seattle respectively.

when asked about the litter, including the needles that are scattered throughout the city, nguyen shared a story when canvassing throughout the district.

“we actually found a bag of — a sports bag — had at least 50 needles in. …it was out in the open and this bag is open, there was a playground across the street. it was just scary.”

this anecdote shows the chilling reality of the problem in the city. there is a lack of respect, not only for the health and safety of the community members, but for the wellbeing of the city itself and its environment.

another candidate that is hoping to unseat councilwoman sawant is egan orion. orion is the director of pridefest in seattle, the head of the broadway business improvement area (bbia) in the capitol hill neighborhood, and a small business owner. his ideals and experience in the private sector have lead him to gain the endorsements from both the chamber of commerce, including a sizable contribution from amazon, and the seattle times.

through his work at the bbia, orion has been able to bring homeless outreach workers to the district in order to “connect with them (homeless individuals), getting to know them, and to help them navigate the system.” along with the outreach workers, he also runs a 7-days-a-week clean up of broadway, “…including needles and graffiti that have become an everyday part of our urban village,” he said.

the focus for orion is showing district residents that seattle needs “a fresh start” — one that focuses on bringing different communities together to include small and large businesses, nonprofits, community organizers, and everyday citizens. orion wants to do “…whatever it takes to move our city forward and solve or mitigate the many problems we face,” which is something he thinks is lacking from councilwoman sawant.

“seattle has a core responsibility to shelter and house our unsheltered population,” said olga laskin, orion’s campaign manager. orion’s campaign website shows that this is also a core focus on his campaign, with sections on solving the homeless crisis to ways to combat the housing affordability crisis in the city.

to address the homelessness crisis in the city orion proposes a bond with king county, for over $500 million in order to get supportive housing to the chronically homeless in the city. these supportive housing units will have wraparound services, “including mental health and addiction recovery services, and provide the stability and support these residents need for a better future,” orion said.

like nguyen, orion wants there to be a focus on a mix of affordable and supportive housing. the center of orion’s affordable housing plan is development based around “light density,” which means more duplexes and triplexes, which would be accomplished through the private sector.

in response to the impacts of homelessness, the orion campaign focused less on the environmental impacts, but rather the impacts on public health.

“yes, there’s garbage and needles, but those impacts are not necessarily more than the mess that sheltered people leave,” laskin said. “they’re just more obvious and more likely to have a public health impact, particularly for those who are unsheltered.”

the orion campaign is correct that people who are sheltered have a greater environmental impact than unsheltered individuals, however, in 2018 the city of seattle collected more than 1,180 tons of garbage from unmanaged encampments.

the ideas of candidates like orion and nguyen on homelessness and housing affordability are in contrast to incumbent sawant. the socialist alternative member of the city council believes that seattle should tax the large corporations in order to supply the city with supportive housing and 100% public housing. this is the only way that sawant is proposing to solve the homelessness crisis in the city, and what her entire campaign is focused around.

there is nothing more to be said about the incumbent’s housing policy or other policies. all problems in seattle can be fixed, in sawant’s opinion, through taxing businesses with a steep progressive tax in order to fund social programs for the masses. in the almost five years she has been in office, little has been done to achieve any of the bold policies sawant has presented on homelessness, affordability, and environmental issues.

along with nguyen and orion, sawant​​​​​​​ challengers include: pot shop owner logan bowers, it business owner pat murakami, and zachary dewolf who won his election last year to be on the seattle school board.

on the aug. 6 primary, voters were clear that they want change in their elected representative, with 64% of voters choosing to vote for a candidate that presented pragmatic and tangible solutions to the crises that seattle is facing.

as of aug. 9, councilwoman sawant received 36% of the vote, while during her 2015 primary showing she received 52% of the vote. her challenger in the november general election is egan orion, who received 22% of the vote. ami nguyen came in 5th place with just over 9% of the vote.

the coming months will show if orion will be able to bring together a large and inclusive coalition together in order to bring a “fresh start” to city council.

“so is my life at ivywall: replete with beauty and enjoyment. and the rose, that is its central ornament and pride.”  -thomas seaton donoho

donoho had a love for the ivy plant, so much so that he would write poetry and a book about the plant. but his greatest stamp on history for his love for ivy was the naming of the historic ivy city neighborhood in northeastern washington, d.c.

ivy city has a rose, the crummell school, which the residents in the neighborhood once had great pride and joy in. since its closure in 1977, the school has withered and been neglected by every stakeholder involved: local government, local businesses, and even the residents themselves.

after decades of neglect, in 2016 there were plans to redevelop the school after decades of no substantial plan. these plans would give the school the chance to bloom into the rose ivy city needs.

“the tale hath history told – but words are weak, and may not with the pencil’s eloquence speak.” -donoho

opened in 1911, the crummell school was named after african american preacher and academic alexander crummell. the school served the black community of ivy city, not only as a primary school, but as the community center that held the neighborhood together.

prior to the school closing in 1977, it experienced turmoil and problems that it never recovered from. in the years since, it has been a failed day care, a failed bus parking lot, and finally a d.c. historic site that the environmental protection agency has labeled a brownfield — a property “which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant.”

for the crummell school, the hazardous contaminants include arsenic, barium, chromium and lead. this contamination not only impedes the economic development of the land, but creates a negative environment for the public health of everyone in ivy city. cleaning and redeveloping the land will increase the standard of living for the residents in the neighborhood.

“my ivy, and mist the storm soon tear thee from thy trust, strewn wild and withering, and i, alone, hopeless to battle with a world or wrath!” -donoho

there are two redevelopment plans being explored. one plan turns the land into a community center, health clinic, 100% affordable housing, and a park. the other plan turns the land around the school into townhouses, restaurants, community center and the expansion of a local fish distributor.

the first plan, developed by empower dc — a local grassroots organization aimed at improving the lives of low and moderate-income washington, d.c. residents—  ultimately lost in the bidding to ivy city partners, a group of businesses interested in developing the area, which has led to tension between all of the stakeholders.

parisa norouzi, the executive director of empower dc, hints that the tension of the crummell school project might increase.

“next steps may be lawsuits…by any means necessary,” she proclaimed.  “it’s not a matter of playing fair at this point.”  

the empower d.c. plan primarily was developed by the group, which already had represented the residents of ivy city in another instance when they faced a bus parking lot installation on the crummell school property. empower dc successfully sued to block the washington, d.c. government from turning the lot into a parking lot for tour buses. the project would have exposed residents to harmful exhaust fumes and other pollution, as well as additional traffic. the successful fight connected ivy city residents with empower dc, and proved the organization had the neighborhood’s well-being in mind.

the focus of empower dc’s plan was to create a space that would mirror the community’s needs with only 100% affordable housing, a health clinic and a community center. what would make the project elevate ivy city would be the addition of a park and basketball courts, in which the neighborhood has neither. both of these entities create positive environmental and public health outcomes that all members of ivy city will experience.

the benefits of a public park include decreased air pollution and car crashes due to the greater access to a walkable area, according to the center for disease control. the personal health benefits include  risk of some cancers, improvement of mental health and mood, reduced instances of obesity, and the strengthening of bones of muscles due to increased physical activity.

“parks are essential for high density, urban, walkable areas. it’s important that the parks you build are not only well planned, but more importantly well managed,” said christopher leinberger, chair for the center for real estate & urban analysis at the george washington school of business.

for a park to work, “its best if the neighborhood itself manages the park…[and] have a source of funding” he stated. “wishing does not make it happen, someone has to have the foresight and a checkbook.”

these factors have to be in place so that citizens can reap all the benefits of a park, which is a challenge for any neighborhood.

“for sympathy had brought our lives together in a sweet unison: we smiled, we wept, we hoped and feared together.” -donoho

the construction of the park is the major benefit of the empower dc plan, however the main issue with the plan is that many jobs initially created will be lost when development is finished. ward 5d, the ward that ivy city is a part of, had an unemployment rate of 18% in 2015, double the city’s average. the poverty rate of the ward is worse, with 30% living below the poverty line in 2015, one of the highest in the city.

a community center and a health clinic are some things that ivy city needs, but the most important need in for the neighborhood is more jobs, which is not something that this bid could deliver.

“how the ivy climbs the tower, embracing it so lovingly, and struggling upward, still upward, with a proud affection, till both together share the sacred light.” -donoho

the other deal from ivy city partners comes from a place that is completely opposite of empower dc. the members of ivy city partners, jarvis company, stonebridge carras, and profish, are corporations with only one, profish, located in ivy city. these companies have a goal for the project to be focused on typical redevelopment,one focused on mixed-income housing and corporate expansion.

chanda washington of the deputy mayor of planning and economic development picked the ivy city partners plan due to the redevelopment plan, the sustainable building practices, and the community involvement. “it was community driven. we are impacting the citizens of the community” says washington.

the greatest benefit of the ivy city partners redevelopment is the jobs created to fill the void in the neighborhood. having profish expand the size and scale of its business, the company also plans to increase the number of employees it has. this would be best for the ivy city, and other surrounding neighborhoods like trinidad, in which 45.5% of the residents have a high school diploma or less.

“this is good news,” says leinberger. “it’s bringing jobs closer to the minority housing concentration on the east side of the region. it’s going to bring jobs, real jobs, jobs where you don’t need a college education.”

what is most important, for leinberger, is that the residents can learn a skill or a trade and be a part of a regional economy. this will make ivy city much less detached than how it has been for so many decades.

one aspect of the ivy city partners bid that is different than the empower dc bid is that there will be a focus on mixed-income housing. this is something that is polarizing when it comes to the redevelopment of struggling neighborhoods. on one side, there is an injection of money and capital from middle to upper middle-class residents that a neighborhood like ivy city desperately needs.

but on the flip side, there is a change of neighborhood that current residents feel would push them out.

norouzi feels that the ivy city partners plan will do just that. “the ivy city community has teetered [with] gentrification,” she said. the washington, d.c. government has hurt ivy city before, with the bus parking lot problem, because she asserts that the administration is in favor of gentrification. for norouzi, ivy city will be changed for the worse if the ivy city partners plan goes forward and not the empower dc plan.

but leinberger emphasizes, “the research shows that gentrified neighborhoods actually have less displacement than non-gentrified neighborhoods because they want to hang around, things have gotten better, why leave?”

he continues by saying there has to be a focus on making sure there is affordable housing for low-income renters, but people want to live in a nice neighborhood that has the jobs that the residents need.

a noticeable downside of ivy city partners is the lack of green space in the redevelopment plan. there will be small community gardens around the actual school, which will become the new community center, which is a stark difference then the empower dc park. the ivy city partners plan loses all of the benefits of the park that will help all of the residents of the neighborhood.

of heart-glow that may make it dear to some – recalling memory in her fairest looks, giving new sunshine to the present day, and confidence to meet the veiled future.” – donoho

in a perfect world, the positive aspects of both plans for the redevelopment of the crummell school would be in place. a well-managed park and community center along with jobs and mixed income housing would replace a decaying school and an empty lot. but in the real world that plan does not exist.

the future of ivy city is veiled, and there are many people, like parisa norouzi, that are not excited about the changes to come, and they aim to stop the plan. others, like chanda washington, think that ivy city partners plan is by the community and for the community. but one thing is true, with a community divided over these two options, ivy city cannot be “fixed in amber in all time” as christopher leinberger will assert. 

a policy focus of theodore roosevelt was on protecting and embracing the natural beauty of the united states. during his tenure as president, he preserved more than 230 million acres of public land, with the majority of the land becoming public forests. his legacy is seen today with the 150 national forests, 51 federal bird reserves, 4 national game preserves, 5 national parks, and 18 national monuments that he created.

roosevelt’s most important legacy is the 1906 american antiquities act. the main focus of the act gives the president the ability to protect special areas as national monuments and expand monument boundaries. sixteen presidents have used the antiquities act, from black canyon of the gunnison, established by president hoover, to the mariana trench marine national monument, established by president bush.

the part of the antiquities act that the trump administration is focusing on is the “smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected”, which gives the president the ability the reduce the size and scale of the monuments. with help from the secretary of the interior ryan zinke, president trump plans to “give the land back to the people.”

obama’s legacy in bear ears

president obama used the antiquities act to establish 12 national monuments, over 2.9 million acres of land, in the final two years of his presidency. this has created some controversy, due to how late in his presidency they were established. one prime example is the bear ears national monument in utah, established dec. 28, 2016.

president obama said in a statement: “for hundreds of generations, native peoples lived in the surrounding deep sandstone canyons, desert mesas, and meadow mountaintops, which constitute one of the densest and most significant cultural landscapes in the united states,” during his proclamation of bear ears national monument.

the cultures president obama references are the native american tribes that have lived in the area, such as the navajo nation, ute tribe, and hopi nation.

the 26th president at odds with the 45th

critics say that president obama did a last-minute grab at a wide variety of land, which negatively affects the lives of americans. one of those critics is president trump. the current president wants to shrink many of the national parks and monuments, and create a greater privatization of these public lands.

according to the national park service, presidents have diminished the land of national monuments 16 times, affecting more than 430,000 acres. the president has the power to do so due to the language in the antiquities act that states, “national monuments… shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”

“giving the land back to the people”

it seems as though president trump is going to use this power to shrink many of the obama-era national monuments to their “smallest area compatible.” secretary of the interior, ryan zinke, is reviewing 26 national monuments to see if they are in compliance with the antiquities act. this review most likely means that monuments that can be reduced within the boundaries of the antiquities act, will be. president trump has signed executive orders in the past that focus on cutting government waste across the board, so this is no exception.

if the size of the monuments are reduced, the land lost to the monuments would most likely become privatized. secretary zinke has stated “some of these areas were put off limits for traditional uses such as farming, ranching, timber harvest, mining, and the land has a chance to be used for these purposes.” secretary zinke and president trump want to reduce the size of the national monuments to save federal dollars and to give control of the land “back to the people.”

giving “control” back to the people, how president trump wants, means that the land will be used for mining, farming and ranching. this may help a few, but will ultimately ruin the land for everyone. creating this “tragedy of the commons” situation will tarnish the legacy that roosevelt set out to create.

native american legacies under threat

for the hopi and the navajo tribes the bear ears national monument is more than a piece of land; it is crucial for their lives and culture. they are connected to that land through their ancestors, their culture, their food, and their medicine. losing that land under the protection of the antiquities act means that a legacy will be thrown to the wolves and potentially ruined for everyone.

president roosevelt wanted americans to conserve and preserve the wilderness as well. he said, “there is none which compares in importance with the great central task of leaving this land even a better land for our descendants than it is for us.”

the concept of conservation and preservation of land, resources, and culture is held by millions of americans who have protested to secretary zinke over his possible recommendations. the 45th president needs to hold and embrace these same ideas of the 26th president, since he has power over millions of acres of land.

on december 23, 2016, president obama angered many americans with the creation of the bear ears national monument, but was within his full legal authority to create it. ultimately, president trump has the same legal right to diminish the size of bear ears and any other national monument, but that doesn’t mean that he should.

here we are exploring the libertarian party and the green party, since these are the largest and most recognized third parties in the united states. members from both parties were interviewed on their party’s environmental ideals and how their party handles concepts such as green energy and climate change.

for the libertarian party, we spoke with chairman nicholas sarwark. founded in 1971, the libertarian party is the third largest national party in america, and it is growing. the slogan of the party is “minimum government, maximum freedom,” creating a focus of the party on individual freedoms. the party prefers a laissez-faire, free market economy with the least amount of government interference as possible.

the green party, founded in 1991, is the fourth largest national party in the united states and is a group of “grassroots activists, environmentalists, and advocates for social justice…” according to the green party website. the main focus of the party is on the environment, and is the basis for many of the ideals of the party. although the party does not have the greatest market share, the party has done important work, such as filing for recount of votes in the 2016 presidential election. giving us a rundown on the green party’s environmental policies is media director scott mclarty.

the first aspect of environmental ideals that was discussed was the paris climate accord and how both parties view the removal of the united states from this international treaty.

when asked about the removal, libertarian chairman sarwark did not focus on the substance on the accord but the amount of power that the president has to make these decisions.

“our biggest issue is we would oppose having a president that has that kind of executive power where they are able to set policy for millions of americans without any checks whatsoever,” sarwark said. for a libertarian, it is not truly the substance of an executive order, but that a president can set policy arbitrarily with no legislative or judicial check, no matter how “good” the policy.

on the other hand, neal gale, a green party candidate in pennsylvania, stated in a press release after president trump’s decision to leave the accord, “this is not president trump’s decision to make. the stakes are too high, the consequences too grave.” this statement demonstrates the real platform of the party, which puts the environment as the most important entity — more vital than any other aspect of life. 

the event of the withdrawal of the paris climate accord leads to the concept of how much the federal government should do to combat climate change.

the role of the government, according to sarwark, is to remove the government completely from the equation.

“the first step is removing some of the government interference in the market. starting with things like subsides for oil and gas explorations and the tax credits and expiration subsides that make oil and gas look cheaper than other, potentially renewable, alternatives. (and) not subsidizing things like solar because … solar is automatically better than wind and nuclear.

“the market alone is the best in determining … what is the best technology, what is the technology that is the most cost-effective, and still provide our energy needs” and not the “too smart people in washington,” sarwark said.

the green party, on the other hand, wants an aggressive federal government in tackling the issue of climate change. mclarty discussed the existential threat and what the federal government needs to do.

“we needed federal government to play a leading role in order to defeat the axis powers in world war ii. climate change represents a comparable global threat,” mclarty said.

the green party wants to take control of climate change in not just the federal government, but state and local governments also because they see it as a shared problem between everyone.

finally, the focus was on the role of the individual on the problem of climate change.   

for sarwark, the main problem is market distortions that are causing individuals to not make the best decisions that they can.

“when you take away some of these subsidies you are able to have a clearer picture of what the true cost is, of coal, or of natural gas, or oil, or solar, or nuclear, or wind,” sarwark said.

by having a clearer picture, then an individual is most informed on all forms of energy and can make the most rational decision possible. in essence, an individual will make the best decision when there is not any government inference, according to libertarians.

the green party sees the role of the individual and government as an inverse of the libertarian party. “individual actions to prevent the advance of climate change are generally too small to have much effect. we need to reorganize the economy… to fight global warming,” mclarty said.

the party’s position is that to shift the economy from carbon producing forms of energy to renewable sources, and the federal, state, and local governments have to take control to help enact these changes. through government intervention, the consumer would be able to make the decisions to take more environmentally friendly actions.

so what’s your take: will you remain a steadfast member of the two-party system, or are you ready to break out and join the independents?

***

correction: a previous version of this story misspelled the name of the libertarian party chairman. it has been corrected to nicholas sarwark.

before becoming a state representative, rep. dyer worked in landscaping and forest management. being in that industry has allowed him to not only understand new hampshire values, but also gain real world understanding of the environment. while serving in the new hampshire house, rep. dyer also works as a graphic designer. “… working with various business owners and startups in new hampshire i have been able to… help their companies grow and become centerpieces of their communities,” rep. dyer said.

we chatted with rep. dyer shortly after new hampshire gov. chris sununu announced that his state would not be a part of the group of states planning to follow the guidelines of the paris climate accord. the reason for this is that new hampshire already has high energy prices, with new hampshire state director greg moore saying doing this deal “will hurt the economy, kill jobs, and drive up energy prices even further on families.”

as a libertarian and a member of the house, rep. dyer has a unique perspective on the environmental issues facing new hampshire, including climate change in a state economy that is reliant on carbon eminent forms of energy. what follows is an edited transcript of rep. dyer’s conversation with planet forward.

q: first, what do you think about your governor’s decision to not be a part of the paris climate agreement with states like california and virginia, etc.?

a: although i have my disagreements with gov. sununu, i actually support that. since the paris accord would focus still more on a lot of economic policy designed to combat climate change. and i don’t really think that new hampshire is in a position to afford those kinds of additional policies.

a policy that is openly discussed in the paris accord is the carbon tax that they wanted to implement, and you know that is going to cost (more) — especially for someone like myself; i heat my house with coal in the winter time. a carbon tax would disproportionately affect people who heat with carbon-based forms…

there are so many things that a carbon tax effects that (it) would make it hard for normal people to live. so, you know there are lots of parts of the paris accord that i just really couldn’t get behind… although i have my disagreements with trump and i have my disagreements with sununu, you know this wasn’t one of them.

q: federal guidelines, such as the clean power plan (cpp), have good intentions when it comes to saving the environment, but do you believe that the greater federal regulations and lack of free market control outweigh the good intentions?

a: i wish that they would do it in other ways. i think the best way is by tax credits. i think that if you incentivize companies to invest in clean energy by giving them tax credits that they can make use of, that would be the most productive use of policy, at least at the federal level.

certainly, i think we can have the discussion of tax credits at the state level, but one of the problems that exist is tax credits at both the federal and state level you start to have this disproportionate effect where the government is now starting to pick winners and losers in the market. and by the very nature of you having a tax credit, it’s almost acting as a subsidy to those companies — which is what it is designed to do, but by raising the cost of all the other forms of energy.

as a libertarian, i resist mandates that act as artificial controls in the market. but i understand why they exist, because if they didn’t exist then it would be very likely that new hampshire would become very reliant on one or two sources of energy, whereas realistically we cannot be so reliant on that. does it increase cost, yes, it does, but it has some value at least.

q: what policy can the federal government do that is environmental but libertarian in nature?

a: tax credits are one thing. the less money that the state takes from companies that are looking to invest in renewable energy is a good thing. does that mean that i think fossil fuel energy providers should be taxed at a higher rate? technically yes, but that’s the nature of tax credits. already the fossil fuel industry has a myriad of tax credits at their disposal that they can use to mitigate their business taxes, and other various taxes that they pay on their property and capital gains. you might as well extend and issue credits to renewable energy companies.

until we are out of the woods with the federal deficit we are not going to be able to make much headway on things that are important, like enabling investment in renewable energy… if i were to, say, go to congress and talk to my federal representatives they are all democrats. and say i want a renewable energy tax credit that’s broad based… they would probably say ‘that sounds like a great idea’ and then go to the congressional budget office and be very quickly disheartened to learn that they can’t afford to implement these types of credits…

q: do you believe actions that help the environment, recycling solar energy, etc., should be voluntary on the individual level, or are they so important that they should be mandatory?

a: obviously the only way that you can address the issue is to change things that you do in your everyday life, whether or not that’s recycling, making more efficient use of your land, growing your own food, buying less meat. there are so many things you can do in your everyday life that can reduce your carbon footprint that it’s really sad that more people don’t make those choices — but we can’t force them to and we shouldn’t. and the best thing we can do is educate people on what actions can reduce their carbon footprint.