The Libertarian candidate for President moves to address his "apparent flip-flop" on global warming with a hard-hitting, comprehensive statement on climate change and energy policy. by George Dance
(libertarian)
Friday, July 25, 2008
Third-party politics blog Independent Political Report (IPR) recently caught Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr in what it now calls an "apparent flip-flop." (1)
On June 6, Barr told CNN's Glenn Beck: "Global warming is a myth. And yet it`s being used by the environmental folks, by the internationalists. A lot of the pressure is coming from the United Nations and other countries. Some of which, like China, of course, are pushing the Kyoto Protocol. Why? Because they`re exempt. It`s going to saddle us. And what is McCain doing? He`s out there buying into this global warming, carbon emission cap and trade." (2)[stress added]
On July 17, after attending ex-VP and climate-change guru Al Gore's "We" Campaign event, Barr released a statement which included the paragraph:
Former Vice President Al Gore and I have met privately to discuss the issue of global warming, and I was pleased and honored that he invited me to attend the "We" Campaign event. Global warming is a reality as most every organization that has studied the matter has concluded, whether conservative-leaning, liberal oriented or independent. I am, however, also aware that scientists differ on its causes, impact and remedies. I remain firmly committed to free market solutions and innovations to address this issue; not tax-driven policies. (3)[stress added]
IPR originally broke the story in a July 18 feature headlined: "Bob Barr ‘flip-flopping’ on global warming confirmed." (4)
Some libertarians, though, disagreed with the "flip-flop" charge. Steve Perkins, webmaster of the Gwinnett Co. (GA) Libertarians, wrote to IPR:
If anyone cares to actually click the links in your post, read them and think for themselves, then they can see that the Beck program discussion addressed the "myth" that man is causing global warming and that the U.N. has to do something to avert doom. The Al Gore press release starts with the "reality" that the world is warmer today than in the recent past, and then immediately [questions] the cause, severity, and remedies available.
Sure… if you hate the guy’s guts to begin with, you can extract the word "myth" from one sentence and "reality" from the other… and howl about how you hate his guts. On the other hand, if you have the motivation to actually read the damn things in full, it’s pretty obvious that there’s no flip-flop there. (4a)
After requests by supporters and others for him to clarify his position, Barr released an explanatory "statement on energy and global warming" on July 24, which says in part:
"One of the most complicated and controversial issues facing America is global warming. Although temperatures have increased in recent decades, the scientific community has been unable to make definitive judgments as to the past cause or future course of climate change. Indeed, the models which predict problems in the future did not predict the lack of any temperature increase over the last decade. Unfortunately, many climate processes are not yet clearly understood.
"Thus, we need to conduct more and better scientific research about climate change to assess likely problems in the future and develop appropriate solutions. More dialogue is key to understanding global warming and developing the best means of dealing with the important questions surrounding the phenomenon. This dialogue must include scientists from all sides of the issue, including those who are skeptical of the assertion that humans are primarily responsible for global temperature changes and that those changes pose a substantial danger to humanity.
"Moreover, we must develop cost-effective policies which will not undermine the U.S. economy. So-called cap and trade legislation, recently rejected by the U.S. Senate, would do grievous damage to the American economy, threatening to create a permanent recession by reversing industrial growth and destroying millions of jobs. Attempting to adjust global temperatures by artificially cutting energy consumption would undermine the very prosperous and innovative market system upon which we must rely for answers to everything from health care to international poverty to environmental protection.
"Our energy future must be built on a commitment to both find more conventional energy sources and expand use of alternative fuels. The U.S. has large deposits of petroleum, oil shale, and natural gas. Barriers to their development in the Outer Continental Shelf, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and other federal lands should be lowered or eliminated, which would provide Americans with a more secure source of energy over the short term and help bring down today's high prices, which are causing such economic hardship to so many Americans. Such steps would also allow us to begin seriously considering and developing alternative sources of energy that will be essential in the long term.
"The development of alternatives to fossil fuels would provide the country with many benefits, ranging from lower CO2 emissions to greater diversity of energy supplies. Given the failure of past government subsidy programs, this transformation can only be led by the private sector.
"The government must remove regulatory barriers, which limit the development of alternative as well as conventional energy sources. Moreover, public officials should cease their demagogic attacks on the energy industry, which has made money only by finding, refining, and transporting gasoline, natural gas, and heating oil for the American people. Vote-minded legislators risk creating an environment in which companies are punished for doing good, which will only make them more reluctant to invest in all technologies and fuels, alternative as well as conventional.
"Indeed, the challenge of promoting continuing energy innovation should cause us to reconsider other policies which discourage business investment and capital formation more generally. Americans for Tax Reform recently reported that the tax and regulatory burden rose at both the state and national level over the last year. America's corporate income tax is one of the highest in the world, creating a self-inflicted economic wound. Congress now routinely votes for new spending programs for which we have no way to pay, putting our entire economic future at risk.
"The challenges that we face are serious, but I am convinced we can find solutions. We are more likely to develop policies that simultaneously promote economic growth, expand energy supplies, and lessen any adverse effects of climate change, if we promote a genuine dialogue among contending factions. Although I do not agree with the tax and regulatory policies advanced by former Vice President Al Gore, I do believe his call for greater reliance on alternative energy could be given positive effect by American industry. Only the market economy can balance his passion with the reality of preserving the growing economy upon which our future -- and that of our children and grandchildren -- depends.
"We must address the issue of climate change, but do so realistically, recognizing the importance of simultaneously expanding energy supplies and maintaining economic growth. Our greatest strength in confronting the problems of the future is our free market economy. Only by reducing government barriers to private research and development are we going to achieve the innovative, even transformational, changes necessary in the years and decades ahead." (5)
(1) "Barr seeks to clarify position on global warming," Independent Political Report, July 24, 2008. http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/07/barr-seeks-to-clarify-position-on-global-warming/
The views expressed
in this article are those of George Dance only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
George Dance is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I know we're not supposed to tell readers to click on the ad links, but otherwise I would highly recommend Lord Monkton's article which is mentioned in one of them. Some of the physics is over my head, but I'm satisfied to have learned that (contrary to what the disclaimer may imply) Lord Monkton subjected it to peer-review himself.
Sounds to me like Bob Barr is not really tuned in to the issue. He is flopping around because he doesn't really understand either side of the argument.
IMHO the right answer for him would be this: Contrary to VP Gore's assertion, the debate is not over. There are very credible scientists on both sides of the AGW issue. Many of the proposed solutions to AGW would cost billions if not trillions of dollars and could strangle our economy. As president I would see to it that an open and public debate is held between scientists on both sides of this issue so that the American people, and in fact all of the world's people, can understand the issues before such a huge economic commitment is made.
David S.: ”Barr ... is flopping around because he doesn't really understand either side of the argument.”
It sounds to me more like he’s trying to appeal to people on both sides of the argument. And why not? Because it’s an argument around a scientific fact, not a political judgement, belief in one side or the other doesn’t prevent anyone from being a libertarian, much less voting or donating Libertarian.
Perhaps because he is trying to appeal to everyone, he has what you’d call the “right answer” in there as well. Here’s the quotes, yours followed by his.
“Contrary to VP Gore's assertion, the debate is not over. There are very credible scientists on both sides of the AGW issue.”
Barr: the scientific community has been unable to make definitive judgments as to the past cause or future course of climate change.
“Many of the proposed solutions to AGW would cost billions if not trillions of dollars and could strangle our economy.”
So-called cap and trade legislation ... would do grievous damage to the American economy, threatening to create a permanent recession by reversing industrial growth and destroying millions of jobs.
“I would see to it that an open and public debate is held between scientists on both sides of this issue”
More dialogue is key....This dialogue must include scientists from all sides of the issue, including those who are skeptical of the assertion that humans are primarily responsible for global temperature changes and that those changes pose a substantial danger to humanity.
Walt: Actually, average global temperatures have decreased 0.6 degrees Celsius since 2001, but I suppose that's quibbling.
Well, maybe, but it does give me a chance to increase the value of this article by adding some verse to it.
The other day, on alt.arts.limericks, I found an anonymous poem pointing out the same discrepancy between Gore's predictions and observed reality:
> What's happened to Gore's global warming? > Where it should be hot, it is storming, > Alaska...he's needed, > But calls go unheeded, > The weather is so non-conforming.
> Observer
So I dashed off the following reply:
Agreed; today's weather is strange. Gore's forecasts were all out of range. But Gore is the man, And he has a new plan: "Let's call it ... er ... um ... climate change!"
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
