Millions of voters say "yes" to billions for conservation and climate
Ballot initiatives received overwhelming support in several states, demonstrating that Americans of all stripes favor environmental protection.
“This goes to show that people can still agree on clean water and the environment, no matter what your politics are.’’
— Michelle Stockness, executive director of Freshwater
Many environmentalists are deeply disappointed by this week’s U.S. election results. A second Trump administration will bring setbacks in confronting climate change and protecting our clean air and water. However, there is good news to share from Election Day: Millions of voters across the country voted for powerful conservation and climate measures.
Here’s a few:
In California, 5.5 million voters (58 percent) approved Proposition 4, a bond initiative that allocates $10 billion toward climate change mitigation, wildfire prevention and clean drinking water.1
“Voters have yet again made it clear that they believe in the need to prepare California for the ever-growing impacts of climate change,” Alfredo Gonzalez, an environmentalist who headed the campaign, told CalMatters. “This bond enables the state to invest in climate solutions at scale, and we urge our leaders to continue to deliver results that protect our communities and economy.”
In Washington, 1.7 million voters (62 percent), defeated an effort to overturn the state’s Climate Commitment Act, which establishes a cap-and-trade program for carbon emissions. Reporter Jerry Cornfield with the Washington State Standard writes:
“It is one of a suite of laws intended to drive down greenhouse gas emissions in Washington to 45% below 1990 levels by 2030, 70% by 2040, and 95% by 2050.
The Climate Commitment Act is arguably the state’s most ambitious policy for curbing greenhouse gas emissions by putting a price on pollution.”
In Minnesota, 2.5 million voters (78 percent) approved a constitutional amendment that dedicates 40 percent of lottery proceeds toward environmental protection. The move extends a commitment that has generated $1 billion over 36 years for conservation.
From the Minnesota Star Tribune:
“This goes to show that people can still agree on clean water and the environment, no matter what your politics are,’’ said Michelle Stockness, executive director of Freshwater, a St. Paul-based nonprofit. “We’re lucky to have a fund like this and other states would love to have it.’’
In Suffolk County, New York, 72 percent of voters approved a sales tax that will generate $6 billion to preserve clean water and protect the Long Island coast, home to whales, menhaden, seals and seabirds. Aging septic tanks have been closing beaches and causing algae blooms for decades. The initiative will provide funding to update the county’s sewage system.
“This victory is the culmination of decades of work and shows the power of dedication and collaboration. The universal need for clean water transcends all politics,” the Nature Conservancy’s Long Island Policy Advisor Kevin McDonald said in a press release.
In Rhode Island, 67 percent of voters approved a $53 million “Green Bond” to fund open space and parks, coastal resilience, forest management and restoration, farmland protection, brownfield reclamation and upgrading a port facility to support offshore wind development.
“The bond will lead to meaningful investments in climate resilience, and the protection of farms, forests and open space — all of it will benefit the bay and watershed,” Jed Thorp, director of advocacy for the nonprofit Save The Bay, told ecoRI News.
In Louisiana, 73 percent of voters approved a constitutional amendment to fund coastal restoration and climate change resilience with federal revenues from energy projects.
In Illinois, voters in three counties passed a combined $500 million for conservation, including buying land, preserving public space and improving recreational opportunities.
“Even people who don’t use the forest preserves like the idea they exist,” Brook McDonald, president and CEO of the Conservation Foundation told Chicago’s WTTW.
In Iowa, 78 percent of voters in Johnson County approved $30 million in bonds for conservation while Story County voters approved $25 million.
In Florida, 84 percent of voters in Osceola County approved a property tax to raise $70 million to extend their lands conservation program, which since 2004 has acquired more than 3,300 acres to protect water resources, preserve wildlife habitats, provide public green spaces and support passive, resource-based recreation, according to 1000 Friends of Florida.
In Maine, voters approved a $30 million bond for outdoor trails, including repair and maintenance in the face of floods and climate change.
“When the issue of conservation and climate is highlighted and elevated on the ballot, we find time and again that voters overwhelmingly support these initiatives,” said Adam Snyder of The Nature Conservancy in a press release. “This year is no different, with 66 percent of voters supporting conservation and climate proposals.”
How about climate policy?
Many are fearful that a second Trump administration will roll back progress on climate change. However, others are skeptical that he can slow the massive momentum around renewables. The public is demanding climate solutions, which are not just planet-saving, but also make economic sense.
From NPR:
Yet, a second Trump administration will not be able to stop the country’s transition to cleaner sources of energy, analysts and activists say. Costs for a lot of those technologies are falling fast. Companies are under pressure from their customers and investors to deal with climate change. And states led by Democrats and Republicans alike are reaping economic benefits from new factories and power plants that have received government support.
“It’s not that our job hasn’t gotten harder” with Trump’s reelection, says Mindy Lubber, chief executive of Ceres, a nonprofit that advocates for clean energy. “But there is a legitimate vein of opportunism, of entrepreneurial spirit, of new jobs, of new economics, of business people, of entrepreneurs, of business school leaders who are saying, ‘We need to deal with climate change because of the financial risk, the material risk and, of course, the human risk.’”
The environmental movement is bigger than one candidate, one party or one country. Millions of us are saving the planet. Every night ends in sunrise. Let’s get it done.
I don't focus on what I'm up against. I focus on my goals and I try to ignore the rest.
— Venus Williams
About Earth Hope:
Earth Hope is a solutions-based journalism project that highlights environmental success stories from around the globe, because hope is the foundation of progress. I’m Amanda Royal, a former newspaper reporter and current eco-news junkie. Read more about this project and what inspired it.
California’s Prop 4 was not supported by all environmentalists. Those concerned about CalFire’s plan for sensitive chapparal environments were opposed.
As a former grassroots environmental activist, I can definitely attest to the fact that folks from the left and right agree on environmental protection. Our natural resources are shared amongst all demographics, and I only wish that everyone could see that human rights belong in the same category. You’ve done a marvelous job collecting these stories of hope and spreading the news for readers to enjoy. Thank you!
Good for you, showing us a bright side. Thank you.