From the NYTimes (subscription required) comes the strongest indicator that Gore will run, but probably not soon. The article, by James Traub, is quite long, mostly fawning, sometimes critical.
Below are some excerpts:
- Gore on the environment and public policy . .
"The central challenge," . . . "is to expand the limits of what’s now considered politically possible. The outer boundary of what’s considered plausible today still falls far short of the near boundary of what would actually solve the crisis."
Gore’s great fear is that business lobbies and lawmakers will unite around some kind of compromise legislation that will demonstrate "commitment" without actually driving up the cost, or driving down the permissible volume, of carbon emissions. And he views even the most stringent legislation as inadequate.
- Gore on Kyoto Agreement in Clinton Administration
"If I had been president, would I have bent every part of the administration and every part of the White House to support this? Yes, I would have. Does that translate into criticism of President Clinton for not doing this? No. I was vice president, not president."
- Gore on Running
When I asked Gore why he hasn’t dismissed all the speculation by issuing a Shermanesque refusal to stand, as he did in 2002, Gore said, "Having spent 30 years as part of the political dialogue, I don’t know why a 600-day campaign is taken as a given, and why people who aren’t in it 600 days out for the convenience of whatever brokers want to close the door and narrow the field and say, ‘This is it, now let’s place your bets’ — If they want to do that, fine. I don’t have to play that game."
The only conclusion that one can make is that if Gore really wants to change environmental policy, he needs to be in a position higher than Vice President.
I know a lot of people think he can go on being an advocate--but there is a world of difference between being an advocate and an agent of change.