In an instant, climate change can realign politics. Here, Democratic President Barack Obama tours devastated parts of New Jersey with Republican Governor Chris Christie.

The road to Election Day has gone from sarcastic remarks in Tampa, to two debate moderators apologizing for not asking the climate change question, to Republican standard bearer Gov. Chris Christie touring his devastated home state with President Obama, to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg penning an op-ed declaring that action on climate change is the central electoral issue.

Pundits like Politico’s Mike Allen have now given voice to what many strategists are already saying.  Sandy and climate change may have changed the campaign’s ultimate outcome.

Sandy has also brought into focus that politicians risk their well-being when the impacts of climate change are ignored.  The year 2012 has seen record drought throughout the Midwest, heat waves scalding our cities, the nation’s largest outbreak of West Nile Virus and wildfires torching homes and millions of acres.  All of these events hit the electorate at the personal level impacting families, property and communities.

Poll after poll has shown the public awaking to climate change’s role in exacerbating and accelerating all of these impacts. Combined with the steady and expanding stream of images of Sandy’s destruction, these impacts and events take the nation to Katrina 2.0. So whatever the outcome next Tuesday, the person sitting in the Oval Office will have to act to address the unfolding climate crisis because we all know the next extreme weather event is just around the corner.

Before you vote next week, you can send a message to the candidates that you want them to talk about climate change and protect wildlife.  Take action here.

What was completely lost in the discussion is that increasing oil drilling in the United States will not bring down prices at the pump, and, since oil prices are set on the world market, more drilling here at home will do little to reduce gas prices.  In fact, an Associated Press analysis of 36 years of Energy Information Administration data shows “no statistical correlation” between domestic oil production and gas prices.  In short, we just can’t drill our way to cheaper gasoline.  Increasing vehicle efficiency is a far better solution to decrease our dependency on oil and gas.

I catch a breather near Gunsight Pass in Glacier National Park

Also missing from all the finger-pointing over gas prices was any recognition of the fact that the explosion of drilling in this country over recent decades has had a profound impact on water resources, air quality, and fish and wildlife habitat.  These vital resources suffer because of the direct cumulative impacts of the drilling process but also because burning fossil fuels is warming our planet and causing global climate change, which carry devastating consequences for decades to come.

We have yet to see enough detail in the debates, from either candidate, as to how they plan to protect wildlife, wild landscapes and recreational opportunities even as oil and gas permitting increases.  Governor Romney’s energy plan proposes opening new, sensitive offshore areas for drilling, fast-tracking the Keystone XL pipeline, undermining environmental review, and turning over control of federal public lands to states for the purposes of energy development.  However, nowhere in Governor Romney’s plan does it even mention the importance of the conservation of  fish and wildlife, and we have yet to hear a commitment from the campaign to protect the water we drink and their air we breathe from more drilling.

Coalition delivers over 160,000 petition signatures to the offices of PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

The petitions, signed by supporters of the National Wildlife Federation and eight partner organizations, including League of Conservation Voters, the Climate Reality Project, and Moms Clean Air Force–urge Jim Lehrer to ask the presidential candidates about their plans to deal with climate change.

On October 3, President Obama and Governor Romney will square off in the first of three presidential debates. The focus will be domestic policy issues, with candidates responding to questions on the most pressing challenges facing our nation.

It would be irresponsible if they failed to address climate change–one of the greatest threats to wildlife today.

Debate to be Held in State Suffering from Climate Change

Black bears  are going hungry from extreme droughts.

Black bears in Colorado–where the first debate will be held–are desperate to find food as heat and drought shrink their food supply, causing them to wander into towns and neighborhoods searching for sustenance.

In Colorado climate change is worsening droughts that led to a crop failure in 62 of the state’s 64 counties. As crops are failing, so are black bears’ woodland foods–serviceberries, chokecherries and acorns–that just can’t grow well enough in the heat, drought and wildfires.

Elections Coverage Must Address Climate Change

Despite the gravity of the climate challenges we face, the issue has been largely absent from television news and election coverage. Americans need to know that their leaders will work to protect wildlife and their habitats by fighting climate change.

“Voters want to know how the next president will work to solve the climate crisis that is knocking on the door today and staring our future generations right in the face,” said Joe Mendelson, Director of Climate and Energy Policy at National Wildlife Federation.

Share this image on your Facebook page, then post a message on the PBS NewsHour’s Facebook page telling presidential debate moderator Jim Lehrer you want him to “Ask a question about climate” http://www.facebook.com/newshour

Climate change must be part of the conversation. Americans deserve to know how the next president will deal with the nation’s most urgent environmental challenges.

Keep the Momentum Going

Post a comment on PBS NewsHour’s Facebook page urging Jim Lehrer to “Ask a question about climate.”

Then, share this forest fire image on your Facebook page to help more people urge Jim Lehrer to ask President Obama and Governor Romney to lay out their plans on climate change.

(Photo: Todd Benson)

Here are some of the biggest myths about KXL, and the facts behind this massive threat to our wildlife and the planet’s future.

MYTH #1: Keystone is a jobs juggernaut.

FACT: On their website, TransCanada asserts that Keystone XL will create 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs, and 118,000 “spin-off” jobs. Pro-Keystone politicians have consistently parroted these claims, but TransCanada’s job numbers are complete fabrications: The Washington Post fact-checkers gave these claims two “Pinocchios” and, according to the Cornell University Global Labor Institute, “The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is not substantiated” and “KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at all in putting Americans back to work.” In fact, the State Department’s own study, which many pipeline opponents felt was tilted pro-industry, suggests that far fewer jobs will be created and most of them will be temporary and non-local.

MYTH #2: Keystone XL will improve America’s energy security.

FACT: The Keystone XL pipeline is designed for one thing—to send oil from Canada to the Texas Gulf coast, and from there to overseas markets. According to retired Brigadier General Steven M. Anderson (the US Army’s senior logistician in Iraq from 2006-2007), the pipeline “would set back our renewable energy efforts for at least two decades, much to our enemies’ delight. It would ensure we maintain our oil addiction and delay making the tough decisions regarding energy production, management and conservation that we need to start making today.” And as Anderson makes clear, “Canadian oil won’t replace imports from hostile countries because Texas refiners are serving global demand rather than domestic need.”

MYTH #3: Keystone XL is safe.

US Fish & Wildlife officers work to rescue birds after a massive 2010 tar sands pipeline rupture in Michigan (photo: USFWS-Midwest Region)

MYTH #4: The government review process for Keystone XL has been fair and thorough.

FACT: Perhaps most troubling, we still do not know whether the US State Department’s new assessment (in process now) will include consideration of climate impacts – the single biggest reason to stop this pipeline. And in the first go-round, State (the agency responsible for vetting the project) conducted a sham review during its analysis of TransCanada’s original proposal. State’s activities were tainted by a conflict of interest in favor of the project and they failed to assess pipeline safety issues with any rigor, inadequately consulted numerous Tribal nations, and neglected to protect Americans from eminent domain threats made by TransCanada. This included preferential treatment for TransCanada’s chief lobbyist (a former aide to State Department Secretary Clinton), as well as outsourcing much of the review process to a company who counts TransCanada as a major client.

MYTH #5: Keystone XL will reduce our energy prices.

FACT: According to its own secret documents submitted to the Canadian government, TransCanada expects the pipeline to increase gas prices in the Midwest by up to 15 cents per gallon. Currently, a surplus of gas in the region means that our prices stay stable. If the pipeline is built oil companies will be able to send their product to the Gulf coast for export, which will reduce this surplus and drive up costs for Midwestern consumers.

MYTH #6: Canadian tar sands will be developed anyway, even if we don’t build the pipeline.

FACT: Right now, Canada’s oil companies are stuck with two buyers: Canada and the United States. Keystone XL is by far the easiest route for the industry to send crude oil through the US to international ports (and access to lucrative foreign markets), which would drive further investment in the tar sands region. It’s a bit like the line from “Field of Dreams” — If you build it, they will come. The Canadian government has made a lot of noise about bypassing the US entirely in favor of the proposed “Northern Gateway” pipeline that would stretch from Alberta to Canada’s west coast, but its chances are shaky due to strong opposition in British Columbia and from native communities along its path. Any western route may face decades of litigation, by which point the tar sands may be obsolete as clean energy technology matures. Other pipelines are being proposed in the US, but they face the same level of opposition as Keystone.

Keystone XL threatens iconic species like the Sandhill crane (photo: Richard Hurd)

MYTH #7: The pipeline poses no risk to the Ogallala aquifer.

FACT: The Ogallala – a vast underground reservoir – is one of the world’s most important sources of freshwater for drinking and irrigation. In Nebraska, TransCanada’s proposed route cuts directly across the aquifer and through fragile ecosystems geologically similar to the Sandhills region, threatening the livelihoods of local farmers and ranchers, wildlife and millions of people who depend upon the Ogallala. Tar sands oil contains high concentrations of benzene and other carcinogens, which raises the potential for widespread water contamination.

MYTH #8: Keystone XL will generate billions in tax revenue for American federal, state, and local governments.

FACT: TransCanada claims that KXL would generate nearly $6 billion in property and other taxes, but the Cornell study repeatedly shoots down TransCanada’s economic claims, saying that “What is being offered by the proponents is advocacy to build support for KXL, rather than serious research aimed to inform public debate and responsible decision making.” Like their jobs figures, this tax revenue estimate seems to have materialized out of thin air, especially when you realize that the original Keystone pipeline has fallen far short of projections for tax revenue.

Decision Time

Regardless of who wins the election in November, tar sands and other forms of “extreme energy” like deepwater drilling and natural gas “fracking” will continue to dominate the conversation. But in our rush to feed our appetite for cheap power, it’s essential that we don’t lose sight of sustainable answers like strong automobile gas standards, energy efficiency, and next-generation technologies like solar and offshore wind — the real answers to many of the problems that Big Oil has dumped in our laps. Keystone XL would come with an enormous price tag for our health and North America’s wildlife, would have a devastating impact on Earth’s climate, and would do next to nothing for our energy security or fiscal problems. It’s an easy decision.

Speak up to protect wildlife and our communities from the threat of tar sands oil! Tell your elected officials to stop the Keystone XL pipeline and halt Big Oil’s plans to keep us hooked on the world’s dirtiest fuel.

Learn more at NWF.org/tarsands