Democrats and global warming

　　A RECENT sketch on Saturday Night Live suggested how the world would be if Al Gore had won the presidency in 2000. In the last six years we have been able to stop global warming, intoned Mr Gore. No one could have predicted the negative results of this. Glaciers that once were melting are now on the attack.
　　Nerdy environmentalism is Mr Gore's forte. He would have ridden that hobby-horse in the 2000 campaign, according to Joe Klein in Politics Lost, if his political consultants had not muzzled him. Now, almost alone, he has brought his favourite issue back into the political spotlight. His film about the horrors of global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, opened this week in Los Angeles and New York.
　　With it comes inevitable talk of another try at the presidency. Mr Gore consistently waves that away. But other prominent Democrats are raising their voices for the cause. This week Senator Hillary Clinton urged action on global warming in a big speech on energy policy in Washington, DC. Notably, she praised Mr Gore (now a potential rival for 2008, whatever he says) as a committed visionary on global warming for more than two decades. Last week, her husband Bill told graduates at the University of Texas's public affairs school in Austin-as temperatures outside soared to 34°C-that Climate change is more remote than terror, but a more profound threat.
　　Do voters care? Although a Gallup poll this spring found that 67% of respondents thought the quality of the environment was getting worse (a fairly steady rise from 54% in 2002), climate change is hardly in the class of Iraq or health care. And it is still rare for politicians to mention it on the stump. Bill Ritter, the Democratic nominee for governor in Colorado, notes that global warming is a worry for the ski industry in his state-but says his audiences care more about the quality of their water or their air. Most midwestern politicians nowadays cannot talk enough about alternative fuels, but they link them to the economy (and national security) rather than climate change, hoping for a boost for local corn or soyabean farmers.
　　A few bad hurricanes may change that indifference. The 2006 season begins next week, and federal meteorologists predict it will be particularly nasty. Although conservatives have vigorously disputed the link between global warming and last year's dreadful storms, another Katrina could push people over the edge. Gregg Easterbrook of the Brookings Institution, a think-tank, says that politicians also need a new tack. Instead of dwelling on gloom and doom, they should appeal to American optimism, emphasising that the problem can probably be solved after all, and cheaper and faster than anyone thinks.
　　And what about conservatives? George Bush has recently conceded that America is addicted to oil, but he still argues about the causes of global warming. (He may be the last person in America who refuses to accept the science on this, sighs Jay Inslee, a congressman from Washington state.) John McCain, another possible presidential contender in 2008, has been out in front. He has sponsored legislation (with Joe Lieberman, a Democrat) for cap-and-trade emissions of greenhouse gases, and declared in a recent speech in Phoenix that Climate change is real and is having a major impact on our way of life.

　　参考译文：

　　民主党与全球变暖

　　周六晚间直播节目最近的一部时事讽刺剧影射了阿尔•戈尔赢得2000年总统大选后世界的情况。戈尔先生抑扬顿挫地说道：在过去的六年里，我们是可以阻止全球变暖的。当时没人会预见到今天这样糟糕的结果。一度处于消融状态的冰河现在开始攻击了。
　　书虫式的环境保护主义正是戈尔先生的拿手好戏。乔克•莱恩在其《迷失的政治》中提到，当时如果戈尔的政治参谋们没有捂紧他的嘴巴，那他就会在2000年的选举战中大侃环保。如今的他，已是孤军奋战。即便如此，他还是把最喜爱的问题带入了政治聚焦之内。他的记录片《难以忽视的真相》讲述了全球变暖的种种骇人之处。这部电影已于本周在洛杉矶和纽约上映。 
　　二次参选的话题总是无法避开。对此，戈尔先生以一贯的挥手来给出否定的回答。但民主党的其他要员开始为竞选摆开了阵势。本周，在华盛顿特区的一次关于能源政策的大型讲演中，希拉里•克林顿敦促政府采取措施抵御全球变暖。她还特别称赞了戈尔先生（他现在怎么说都是2008竞选的一大潜在对手）是一位远见卓识的人，在全球变暖问题上忠于职守了二十年。上周，在位于奥斯汀的德州大学公共事务学院，她的丈夫比尔•克林顿告诉该校的毕业生，当室外气温超过34°C时，气候变暖便不再是一个遥远的可怖之事，而是一个巨大的威胁。
　　投票者会关注这些吗？尽管今年春天的一项盖洛普调查显示，67%接受调查的人认为环境质量正变得更差（这是在2002年的54%基础上的稳步增长），但是气候变化问题根本不能与伊拉克或医疗问题比肩。而且，政客们登台演说时很少提及这个问题。民主党科罗拉多州长竞选提名者比尔•瑞特发现，全球变暖困扰的是该州的滑雪产业。但他又表示其听众更关注该地水和空气的质量。多数中西部的政客们如今大谈特谈代用燃料。然而，他们将落脚点放在了经济（还有国家安全）而非气候变迁，希望以此为当地种植玉米和大豆的农民带来福音。
　　也许几场严重的飓风会一改那种漠视的态度。2006年季风将于下周拉开帷幕。联邦气象学家预测它将带来异常大的威胁。虽然保守者们对全球变暖与去年那可怕的风暴之间的因果联系表现出极力的怀疑，但倘若克里娜式的台风再度光顾，人们的心理防线会被完全击垮。作为布鲁金斯研究院之一的格雷格智囊团易斯特布鲁克表示，政治家们还需要一个新的方针。他们应当迎合美国的乐观主义传统而不是固守阴郁、厄运的基调，即强调气候问题终将以大大超出人们想象的更廉价、迅捷的方式得到解决。
　　保守者们会如何应对呢？乔治•布什最近承认美国染上了石油瘾，但他依然对全球变暖的原因持怀疑态度。（华盛顿州议员杰伊•恩斯利感叹道，即便所有的美国人都接受全球变暖的科学道理，布什也不会接受。） 2008年总统选举可能的角逐者约翰•麦肯克已冲在了最前沿。他（与一位民主党人乔•列伯曼）发起了旨在控制温室气体排放的限量管制与交易提案，并在最近于凤凰城发表的一次演讲中宣称气候变迁是真实的，它正对我们的生活方式产生强大冲击。