When I first read this next blurb, I couldn't believe my eyes ...
Frank Luntz Advice To Environmentalists: Don't Talk About Climate Change
huffingtonpost.com -- 01-22-10
Frank Luntz ... wants to help environmentalists in their push for legislation to combat climate change. His advice? Stop talking about climate change.
When I first read this, I was dumbfounded:
1) Why is Luntz helping Dems and Progressives?
2) Could such an emotionally-discharged approach work?
3) Does Mr Luntz actually believe what he's saying, or is he working some angle?
Frank Luntz is a paid word-smith and pollster, afterall ...
SO, why is Luntz helping Dems and Progressives, to promote Climate Change ... "a Clean Energy Economy" ?
The short answer: Because he believes it's "in America's best interests" ...
The First Rule of Fighting Climate Change: Don't Talk About Climate Change
by Kate Sheppard, motherjones.com --Jan. 22, 2010
[...]
Luntz's report, "The Language of a Clean Energy Economy," finds that the majority of the public across the political spectrum is convinced that global warming is happening and caused at least in part by humans. But, Luntz says, talking about the problem won't win support for the legislation that would solve it. Among both Democrats and Republicans polled by his firm, addressing climate change was the least important reason to support a cap-and-trade policy.
So what should environmentalists say instead? Luntz suggests less talk of dying polar bears and more emphasis on how legislation will create jobs, make the planet healthier and decrease US dependence on foreign oil.
Advocates should emphasize words like
"cleaner," "healthier," and "safer";
scrap "green jobs" in favor of "American jobs,"
and ditch terms like "sustainability" and "carbon neutral" altogether.
"It doesn't matter if there is or isn't climate change," he said. "It's still in America's best interest to develop new sources of energy that are clean, reliable efficient and safe."
[...]
In fact, Luntz warned that if Republicans continue to dispute climate science it could hurt them politically. Instead, he said, the GOP should be engaging in the debate over to solve America's energy problems. "You have to do something new, and you have to do it better," he said. "If you are representing the polices of the past, you will be kicked out."
SO, could such an emotionally-discharged approach work?
It would seem so, if Luntz's polling and focus-group research is accurate ...
Here are some of the polling highlights from the previous mentioned Luntz's report:
The Language of a Clean Energy Economy (pdf)
2010, The Word Doctors
[Pg 9]
If a company was genuinely interested in energy and environmental issues, which of the following do you MOST want them to focus on? (Choose 2, Combined Answers)
Greater energy efficiency ....... 47%
A healthier environment ....... 41%
A cleaner environment ....... 32%
Reduced energy consumption ....... 29%
Greater environmental stewardship ....... 24%
Becoming carbon neutral ....... 12%
None of them – it is a waste of time ....... 8%
[Pg 12]
Regardless of Beliefs About Climate Change It’s Still the RIGHT TIME to ACT
It doesn’t matter if there is or isn’t climate change. It is still in America’s best interest to develop new sources of energy that are clean reliable, efficient and safe ....... 57%
[Pg 13]
National security tops every other reason to support cap and trade.
It’s about freeing the U.S. from foreign oil – and opening the door to greater security and prosperity.
This is true across demographic lines, and especially among opinion elites.
[Pg 23]
WORDS TO USE
If we do it right, we get cleaner air.
We get less dependence on fossil fuels and enhanced national security.
We get more innovation in our economy.
More jobs, and more sustainable jobs.
SO, does Mr. Luntz actually believe what he's been saying ... ?
Is Frank Luntz being just a Climate Change "Opportunist" ... or rather has the weight of the evidence, convinced him to become a Climate Change "Advocate" -- for real?
Check out this next interview and you be the judge:
[Short answer: It may not matter either way -- if his approach actually works.]
A Global Warming Conversion
by Michael Smerconish, thedailybeast.com -- Feb 3, 2010
Frank Luntz is a scientist of the political variety. But he stands to influence the debate over global warming, adding his voice to the climatologists who believe the problem is man made in ways that could speak to lingering skeptics on Capitol Hill.
[...]
It seemed as though Luntz might have changed his tune on the subject. So I asked directly: Where did he stand on the issue?
"I think that the weakest part of the climate change argument in terms of legislation is climate change itself," he told me. He emphasized the importance of accompanying an environmental message by saying that the United States should decrease dependence on Middle Eastern oil. And that the country should prioritize achieving cleaner, safer energy sources. And that climate change overhaul would generate American jobs and build new technologies rather than outsourcing that work to China or India. Luntz concluded: "I have come to support climate legislation not because of the science of climate change," he said, "but because of all the other benefits that it would provide."
[...]
"And the problem with the phrase 'cap and trade' and the problem with focusing on whether there is or isn't climate change is that you miss the bigger point — that these can be jobs that will stay in this country forever. This can be technology such as we created in the space race."
More info
More info
More info
larger
More info
larger More info
larger
And about that "sage advice" from the Reluctant "Environmentalist" "Clean Energy advocate", Frank Luntz ... ???
It is still in America’s best interest to develop new sources of energy that are clean reliable, efficient and safe.
[... such an] overhaul would generate American jobs and build new technologies rather than outsourcing that work to China or India.
... these can be jobs that will stay in this country forever.
That is some good advice. Maybe we can change the world, afterall ...
What we do and say, and leave for future generations ... actually matters, afterall.
Solar Zones on the US Energy Drawing Boards
by jamess -- Mar 18, 2010
Solar Jobs Outlook Looks Strong
by jamess -- Mar 22, 2011
