An article at Politico.com asserts that a growing number of Republicans are buying into global warming. The article points to Rep. Bob Inglis (SC), Newt Gingrich, Ken Mehlman, John Warner and others to make its point.
Inglis traveled to Antarctica and, most recently, to Greenland to witness the effects of rising CO2 levels and temperatures. He now believes the science behind global warming. And he believes the politics are equally conclusive: Republicans will “get hammered” if they do not reckon with the issue soon.
You wouldn’t know it from listening to President Bush or most GOP congressional leaders, but a lot of smart Republican thinkers are coming to the same conclusion as Inglis.
The changing politics of global warming will be a useful gauge to measure change in Washington. Two questions loom.
The first is how Republicans will reposition themselves for a post-Bush era in which it appears that many ascendant issues — the environment and health care especially — are historically favorable terrain for Democrats.
The second is whether even powerful shifts in public opinion, as have clearly taken place on global warming, can force action in a Congress where partisan stalemate has been the operating mode on most difficult issues for over a decade.
There’s nothing wrong with being environmentally aware. I recycle and have done many things around my house to make it more energy efficient. Of course my reasons are a little more selfish. We’re given 1 recycle and 1 trash cart to last us a week between dumps. I recycle to free up room in the trash bin. As far as energy efficiency, I’m tired of high energy bills from Texas Utilities. Similarly, a lot of businesses might be motivated by incentives that would compel them to be more environmentally friendly.
That is the focus of many of the Republicans who seems to have gone green (like Newt). I haven’t read Gingrich’s new book Contract With the Earth, but the reviews and interviews seem to indicate that he is looking for ways to to induce corporate America to invest in environmentalism without resorting to threats, regulations and tax increases. That’s a noble goal. After all, the environment is our responsbility. But doomsaying threats and overregulation are irresponsible.
The fact that some of these guys seem to be buying into the warming myth, though, is a reason for concern. Only two decades ago, we were heading towards an imminent ice age. What happened to that? Why are we suddenly on the verge of a global warming catastrophe?
We aren’t. The science isn’t solid, and the number of scientists willing to say that have grown exponentially since the warming debate “heated up” a few years ago. Leftist environmentalist doomsayers are actively attempting to silence the dissent from experts who refuse to spout their warming rhetoric. My theory is that the left is using this as a platform to increase the control of government over people’s lives – as would be their natural tendency. Of course, that’s just a thought.
There’s nothing wrong with caring about the environment. Developing a sound energy policy that emphasizes alternative energy and less dependence on fossil fuels is a great and necessary idea. Then again, I’m just being selfish. My major interest there is to reduce our dependency on things that come from people like the ones who hold power in Iran and Venezuela.
So, do something for the environment today. Just don’t force it on me. Don’t tax me. And don’t feed me more baloney about some climate phenomenon that has its basis in faulty science.