Category Archives: Trojan Horses and Red Herrings

Claim:

"If anything, there is a case to be made that Congress is kind of rushing on the whole cap and trade legislation. Henry Waxman has said that he wants a bill out by Memorial Day. Barbara Boxer says she wants a bill out of the Senate by a similar time…

"Not surprisingly, people are fixated on the economy. Obama is fixated on the economy. This seems like a low level thing, even though scientists are saying we really need to cut emissions quickly. I think there's a real case to be made for splitting this up and waiting until later this year or early next year on cap and trade until Obama can really focus his full attention on it and do what's possible in the meantime."

– Bradford Plumer, Assistant Editor at The New Republic, March 19, 2009

Truth:

While Bradford Plummer isn't an opponent of global warming action, the question "Why rush this?" is one we hear a lot from many of those who are.

But it's a very thin reed to stand on. We've debated and debated and debated the need for global warming for more than a generation.

Read More »

Claim:

"Why all of a sudden is there so much money for, like, global warming? Why is that so high on the president's agenda? Why are they trying to shut down every coal plant? Have you checked the temperature lately? The new budget contains a cap-and-trade program that is supposed to limit carbon dioxide emissions. Oh, the trees will love it. But if it performs anywhere near as well as the one in Europe — because that one's great – it will likely limit nothing except corporate profits and economic growth.

"…So, if we're worried about the economy, why is that there? Remember one thing: The problem is the solution. The answer to why we're talking about global warming is contained right there in the name — global. Global warming fits perfectly with a global New Deal, because they're both focused on solving everyone's problems all at once — controlling your life globally — while ensuring that America takes on the majority of the world's burden."

– Glenn Beck, the Glenn Beck show on Fox News, March 3, 2009

Truth:

The conspiracy theorists are out in force when it comes to global warming action, and Glenn Beck's quote captures the sentiment perfectly.

Read More »

Claim:

"As I see it, the most important single item in President Obama's budget is his commitment to a cap-and-trade plan (to limit and reduce carbon emissions). It represents nothing less than an absolutely breath-taking attempt at reengineering the entire American economy."

– James Pethokoukis, U.S. News and World Report, February 26, 2009

Truth:

Maybe just a touch of hyperbole here?

President Barack Obama's proposal to cap and reduce America's global warming pollution is a straight forward plan to reduce America's dependence on fossil fuels and foreign oil and put people to work to unleash our green energy future.

This is not a government take over of the energy sector. The only mandate from the government would be to cut global warming pollution. Industries and utilities would be free to make business decisions on the best way to meet these pollution reduction requirements.

A cap on global warming pollution would send a clear market signal that businesses must innovate and adopt cleaner energy solutions or they would have to pay for market-based pollution credits. It is a balanced plan that offers the most efficient and effective way to deal with the growing threat of global warming.

Claim:

"A cap on America's global warming pollution is nothing more than a disguised energy tax that will drive up the costs of energy, particularly among the poor."

– Various opponents of global warming action.

Truth:

Put simply, a cap on global warming pollution is not a tax. In fact, the policy was designed specifically to not be a government run tax, but rather a way to create market incentives to efficiently cut global warming emissions, reward green energy innovation, and rebuild America's energy infrastructure.

Read More »

Claim:

"We utilize energy from carbon not because we are bad people, but because it is the affordable foundation on which profound improvements in our standard of living have been achieved – our health and our welfare.

"I was a physics and chemistry teacher at Nyeri Baptist High School in Kenya, East Africa and witnessed first hand this simple rule – without energy life is brutal and short. World-wide, carbon-based energy demand will grow as Africans and others continue to discover the benefits of technology, medicine, mobility and agriculture and start reaping the benefits of higher standards of living just as we have. Having lived in Africa, I don't see how one could halt the progress they need and will achieve. In my view, international rules to limit energy production will not halt the expansion of their energy use because of the tremendous benefits provided by energy that the energy-poor crave."

– John R. Christy, Alabama's State Climatologist and Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, written testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, February 25, 2009.

Read More »