Here we are fast approaching the midterm election. Donald Trump and Susan Collins can safely watch from the sidelines as those elected offices now under the gun of Maine’s electoral scrutiny stare down the yea or nay disposition of who will survive the gauntlet of our democratic process. On Nov. 6 we get to elect a new governor and retain or replace one U.S. senator, Angus King, two House representatives, Chellie Pingree and Bruce Poliquin, and all those up for reelection in Maine’s Legislature and county offices.

All deserve a thank you for time served and for the courage of their convictions in what’s often an overall “why bother?” disinterest from most eligible voters, or impassioned opposition from many who do still participate in our democracy. The most interesting outcome of this election, here and across the nation at this volatile juncture in increasingly sensationalized politics, will be the actual head count of those that finally show up at the polls. Will there be a Blue wave, or Red, or any wave of any historic size at all?

The second significant curiosity will be how Maine’s outlier leadership on ranked choice voting plays out. Will an unexpected straight-out majority win in the gubernatorial race put the breaks on an uphill battled constitutionally amended RCV inclusion of that office, or will a repeat spoiler effect pour more fuel on the fire of terminating the traditionally accepted plurality path to power. Will RCV have any demonstrable effect at all on who Maine decides to send to Washington?

Voting’s all about leadership’s choices and all about choosing those who demonstrate the promise of improved governance. Leadership isn’t about waiting for an electorate mandate to direct one’s political agenda. Real leadership’s about risking one’s own job security for the benefit of the greater good.

Though only expressed in soundbite generalities, during a recent governor’s race debate all candidates took a surprisingly proactive position regarding global warming. The only trouble is that in all of their short-listed policy concerns the magnitude of this planet’s imminent existential crisis is still not prioritized as the number one problem needing governmental intervention. As if “job creation” won’t likely be even harder in an environmental dystopia.

The U.N.’s Nobel Prize-winning International Panel on Climate Change has recently reaffirmed that we now have about 12 years to halt global warming before it rises above a 1.5 degrees threshold that will cause irreversible catastrophic peril to the planet. 2030 may be way down the road by some reckoning, but almost tomorrow as time flies. The immediacy of a once ridiculed “tipping point” has now finally triggered a sudden reality check even from the likes of a reality lite President Trump. Though now exhibiting what’s currently called Stage 2 climate denial, his once full-fledged disregard for global warming has given way to an admission of its existence while still rejecting mankind’s causation or a call for comprehensive governmental action. To avert cataclysmic destruction of planetary habitation, the IPCC recommendations call for “Immediate rapid far reaching unprecedented changes in all aspects of society” affecting “land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities.” Nothing about tree hugging. Everything about protecting our own undeserved survival.

Transparently motivated by economic priorities reigning supreme over all else, even if the short-term jeopardizes any long-term anything, Trump’s irrational rationalizations for inaction would indeed be laughable if so much wasn’t riding on our need for responsibility rather than electability.

While that Trumpian folly accompanied lesser news items, local front-page news that same day reported on efforts towards making Brunswick’s former navy base suitable for big league 737 aircraft and the collateral economic benefits that might follow. Having just read of our president’s environmentally myopic vision of governance, I couldn’t help being struck by the obvious parallel takeaway of a similar lack of farsightedness right here in coastal Maine.

Despite many jobs-growth achievements, our neighboring Midcoast Regional Redevelopment Authority presents a perplexing Janus-faced stewardship in its environmental management of former BNAS’s conversion for economic development. Its Brunswick Landing side is a commendable model for environmental-economic compatibility spotlighting renewable energy businesses and partnering with solar and bio-gas ventures to power 100 percent of its own energy needs. That’s certainly an all well and good example for other businesses and municipalities in the area. The surreal disconnect comes with its Brunswick Executive Airport persona. That redevelopment project continues operating the site as an aviation based enterprise when that once visionary economic engine has since distinguished itself as a terrible model for environmental responsibility. Aviation’s arguably the single most egregious activity in furthering man-made carbon impact upon the planet. Just google it. Despite its laudable embrace of energy efficiencies, the MRRA seems incapable of connecting the dots overall, like someone installing solar panels on their home but still driving a Hummer.

Created under the auspices of the state legislature, Maine’s incoming governance needs to take a hard look at MRRA’s existing mission, and any other economic development that’s at odds with the far greater good of mitigating any further assault on the now 11th hour survival of the world around us.

Gary Anderson lives in Bath.