EESI at 40: Claudine Schneider Reflects on the Necessity of Communication in Climate Politics

Claudine Schneider, a former Republican U.S. Representative from Rhode Island and long-time member of EESI’s board of directors (2009-2017), looks back at climate policy over the 40 years since our founding. Claudine reflected on her time in Congress, the current state of climate policy, the importance of bipartisanship in policy-making, and EESI’s contributions to the field.

How did you get your start in politics and become interested in climate action?

My entry into the political arena was totally unlike the entry of most elected officials. I was 25 years old and had just been diagnosed with cancer of the lymph system with a very real possibility of dying. I started asking myself what my purpose was, because I believe that we are all here to fulfill a particular purpose. The next thing I know, I'm running for Congress, even though I had no name recognition, no financial resources, and no experience. As a woman running for the first time in 1978, it was extremely unusual. Even though I lost the first race, I was elected in 1980. I told my very fabulous staff that we didn't know how long I'd be here, so we put the pedal to the metal to solve some problems.

Serving on the Science, Research, and Technology Committee, it became clear to me that climate change could be a problem. As an elected official, I felt I had a responsibility to provide an insurance approach to make sure that we could mitigate the threat—even if the scientists turned out to be wrong. You may be familiar with the ENERGY STAR® program, which labels energy-efficient appliances. That was my key piece of policy that passed.

During the 1980s, when I was just beginning my policy work, Carol Werner started working at EESI. As a new member of Congress, I found EESI briefings to be invaluable because the research that EESI did far exceeded what my staff or I might be able to do in order to come up with good solutions for many of the energy and environmental challenges that we were facing. So to me, what continues to blow my mind 40 years later, is the resourcefulness of Carol Werner. I cannot praise her enough for her vision and for her skills in putting together a phenomenal team and setting up an agenda tailored to members of Congress.

What were some of your challenges and successes when advocating for environmental issues and climate action during your time in Congress?

There was resistance within my own Republican party. It was maybe fifty-fifty, because you had environmental champions in the Senate, like Sen. John Chafee from Rhode Island, and a number of other senators and representatives who were environmental champions. However, most members of Congress—even today—do not connect the dots between the environment and human health. So, if you're going to protect the American people, you have to pay attention to impact, and that was one of the good things that EESI did.

There was some resistance, but, regarding successes, my omnibus bill on climate change (the Global Warming Prevention Act of 1988, H.R.5460) had an overwhelming number of bipartisan cosponsors. Now, today, that's unheard of. Communication really is an important skill. If we're talking about learning how to be a leader, you've got to be a good communicator. And you've got to be a good listener to understand what's in it for you.

How has the environmental policy landscape changed from the eighties to the present? How has EESI grown and adapted to the changing policy landscape over the last 40 years?

EESI is exceedingly skilled in anticipating the environmental issues that policymakers need to pay attention to. As a result, those members who take the time and energy to attend the briefings and read the materials are well-equipped to solve environmental problems. EESI, I believe, has done an excellent job keeping many of these issues front and center.

What do you think are some of the biggest challenges we face relating to the climate crisis today?

I think the biggest challenge is that many people, even those in the environmental community, are doing business as usual. But we're in crisis mode right now. I just don't feel that we're moving quickly enough. This issue also goes to the grassroots. If you don't have local governments setting policies, to mandate solar energy and other such policies, we're just asleep at the wheel. So, I feel that the urgency is not occurring at every level of our society, but I particularly hold environmental organizations responsible because they are the advocates needed to move the masses, and I just feel that they're just doing business as usual.

You touched on the partisan challenges of the climate crisis. Why do you think it is important to have nonpartisan organizations like EESI working with Congress on environmental policy?

Too often, those in office have a tendency to say, “Oh, well, that's Republican,” or “That's Democratic.” To them, at this moment in time, it's all about winning. That's not acceptable when the American people are losing and when the planet is losing. So, it is very important for nonprofits to be nonpartisan in their approach.

While you served in the U.S. House, Congress passed some very impactful energy and environmental laws. What were your proudest legislative accomplishments while you were in Congress?

I think that one of the most important things to convey to policymakers and to your average citizen is that money talks. Doing the cost analysis, I think, is critically important. So that would be one of the other principles that I think are critical to inform policy-making. For example, I voted against Ronald Reagan's budget, which I didn't realize is a pro forma vote. You just support your president. But I actually read the budget and concluded that there was too much money being taken out of the environment and education and being put in the defense budget. We need to protect and create a healthy environment.

So, then I thought, I've got a responsibility here. And so I started looking for waste, fraud, and abuse in the budget. And one of the things that I found in my committee, the Science, Research and Technology Committee, was that we were spending $8 billion of taxpayers’ money on the