I am dying to title this post "Know Your Congressional A$$hat, Paul Ryan Edition," but I know I mustn't be rude. And in this case, frankly, a$$hat doesn’t quite cover it.
Let me quote not-yet Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, who said back in 2009:
Unilateral economic restraint in the name of fighting global warming has been a tough sell in our communities, where much of the state is buried under snow.
One might think that this isn’t quite as egregious as Senator Jim Inhofe bringing a snowball to the senate floor to protest that, if it were snowing outside, climate change must be a hoax, but in fact I think it’s worse.
Notice the tacit acknowledgement that, in fact, the planet is warming. And notice the lede – “unilateral economic restraint.”
Paul Ryan isn’t a stupid individual. I may question every single one of his policy proposals, and find his heartless, Ayn Randian views on poverty, healthcare, and entitlement programs loathsome – but I can’t deny that he has a brain in his head. He’s not an idiot. He’s just a doctrinaire conservative with little-to-no empathy for folks he doesn’t know personally.
Which brings me to his views on climate change.
Ryan is officially a “denier.” But I think he’s a denier who knows that climate change is real. I think he’s the most dangerous type of denier — one who is enough of a conservative economic purist that he damns the torpedoes and fights against any climate action, however small, because he’s scared that big government programs are a slippery slope to socialism.
Note how his arguments on the topic tend to be based on economics, not climate science.
Here are a few tidbits on energy and environmental issues, taken from his website. (I won’t hook you up with the link here because that pops a big picture of his grinning mug onto the page, and who wants to see that?)
Keystone Pipeline
After continually dragging his feet, the president completely rejected the permit application for the Keystone XL pipeline in November 2015, arguing that it would undercut American leadership on the global effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change. On January 6, 2015, TransCanada filed one federal lawsuit alleging that President Obama’s rejection of the permit exceeds his power under the U.S. Constitution. The company then filed a second lawsuit challenging that the president violated the North American Free Trade Agreement. The president's decision to reject a project that would have created thousands of American jobs, lessened our dependence on foreign oil, improved national security, and caused minimal environmental impact is disappointing. While I am frustrated with the president's decision to yet again place politics over sound economic policy, my colleagues and I in the House of Representatives remain committed to this project.
Never mind that he is factually wrong on the jobs that the pipeline would have created. And never mind that he is also wrong about the environmental impact. What stuns me is that he doesn’t even bother to deny that we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And why? Because, IMHO, he’s KNOWS that we have to, and Does. Not. Care. Not if he has to do anything that gets in the way of his precious “small government” (except when we are legislating bathrooms or uteri) ideology.
Here’s Ryan opining on the EPA’s Clean Power Initiative
I am also deeply concerned with the EPA’s Clean Power Plan initiative. On August 3, 2015, President Obama released the final version of this plan, which the EPA estimates will cut carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants in the United States by at least 32 percent by 2030 compared to 2005 levels. Unfortunately, rather than trying to grow our economy for everyone by keeping energy costs low, the president is once again picking winners and losers. This final rule would add more burdensome regulations that will destroy jobs and raise energy costs for hard-working families already struggling to make ends meet. It will also do little, if anything, to meaningfully reduce global carbon emissions, according to the EPA's own estimates.
Notice that he cops to “global carbon emissions” and then says, since the proposed regulations won’t reduce them “meaningfully,” they should be scrapped. WTAF?!!??
Here, talking about The Land and Water Conservation Fund, Ryan’s cool with monies for things that he says “drive our economy.”
Wisconsin has received approximately $211.5 million in LWCF funding over the past 50 years for the protection of federal, state, and local resources such as the Ice Age and North Country National Scenic Trails, the Apostle Islands, and Devil’s Lake State Park. Working forests, wildlife habitat, and water quality are further protected by grants through the Forest Legacy Program. Outdoor recreation also helps to drive our economy. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly three million people participate in hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching in Wisconsin each year, contributing $3.9 billion to the state economy.
As part of the FY 2016 Consolidation Appropriations Act, the fund was reauthorized through the end of FY 2018. The legislation appropriates $450 million from LWCF for FY 2016, with more than 50 percent directed to state and local recreation, conservation, and battlefield protection programs. These funds will help ensure that public land is protected and available for recreational use.
In other words, if it creates jobs back home it’s good, but if there isn’t any practical utility for Wisconsin, then who needs it?
Are we noticing a theme?
Paul Ryan cares about the economy, and hates regulations to which he is ideologically opposed. At this point, decades on from Exxon’s seminal (and suppressed) research on climate change back in the 1970s, properly tackling climate change will almost certainly require the type of legislation that Paul Ryan and his ilk in Congress hate. It may well require the “unilateral economic restraint” that he decries while tacitly acknowledging that the problem of global warming does exist.
So by dragging his feet and fighting tool and nail against any sensible climate change legislation, Ryan is only putting off the pain. And he is helping to ensure that, once America does get its act together on climate change, it will be far too late for the sorts of “business friendly” solutions he might have fought for if only he’d proposed them when we had enough time.
He seems to know what’s happening, and simply not care enough to put aside his cherished — and mostly debunked — motions of fiscal conservatism to quite possibly save the human race.
It’s mind-boggling to think that someone who is in a position of power and could make a difference has seemingly chosen to put a price tag on the health of our climate, our children, and our grandchildren. That someone who could prove that he has the vision and the bravery to buck his party and become an actual hero would choose instead to bow to the Chamber of Commerce and his frat boy infatuation with Ayn Rand and actively fight against regulations that might preserve the health of the planet — and not because he doesn’t know that global warming is actually happening, but because he thinks that “too much big gubmint” is never a good thing.
If, indeed, Paul Ryan realizes that the climate is changing, and has CHOSEN to fight against any government action that could reduce emissions and transition us off of fossil fuel, and if he truly understands the consequences of that decision… words fail me.
Paul Ryan could lead. But noooooooooooooo……. No. To his eternal shame.