By David J. Sanders
At last Wednesday’s meeting of the Joint Committee on Energy at the state Capitol, lawmakers heard expert testimony from scientists and policy experts who challenged conventional views on global warming and the real-world experience of global warming policies.
But, the day before the hearing, the newly ensconced Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives tried to shut it down, citing an alleged rules violation in how the meeting was originally scheduled. But after some consultation with state Senate President Bob Johnson and other senators, Speaker Robbie Wills allowed the hearing to proceed but with limitations: it would only be a “informational meeting” for members; no votes would be recorded.
Dr. Richard Ford, an environmental economist at UALR and member of the Governor’s Commission on Global Warming, had originally requested the hearing. He and several other members of the GCGW opposed several of the recommendations in the Commission’s recently released policy report. In it, the Commission recommended that Arkansas lawmakers support a carbon tax, a regional “cap-and-trade” scheme, and renewable energy portfolio mandates for Arkansas utilities, along with other tax increases.
When the GCGW began its work, it did so with one major assumption: Global warming is man-made. Consequently Ford and other like-minded commission members were not allowed to debate the science of global warming.
In his opening remarks, Ford told lawmakers the Commission hadn’t followed the intent of it statutory charter, which required it to “study the scientific data, literature and research on global warming to determine whether global warming is an immediate threat to the citizens in the state of Arkansas.” For Ford it was simple: In order to get the policies right, the group had to get the science right. He also explained that none of the 54 policy recommendations in the report included a cost-benefit analysis.
Climatologist Paul Knappenberger and Robert Ferguson, both from the Science and Public Policy Institute, laid out the evidence to show that climate in Arkansas hadn’t changed over for the 100 years. Knappenberger specifically challenge GCGW’s policy recommendations claiming that if enacted into law, they would not appreciably reduce greenhouse gases or do anything to stabilize global climate change.
Dr. Roy Spencer, climate scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville and 14-year NASA veteran, presented lawmakers with his technical findings from his recent work on the space agency’s Aqua satellite, which point to natural opposed to man-made causes of global warming.
In the hearing’s final presentation, Chris Horner, author and fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, reviewed Europe’s experience with cap-and-trade. He cautioned lawmakers that its net effect has been to drive jobs off the continent while having little, if any, impact on lowering carbon emissions. In fact, he showed how covered EU emission actually rose even while economy-wide emission dipped.
The only audible response from lawmakers during the presentations came when Horner read from e-mails from his former boss, Enron’s CEO, Kenneth Lay, a tireless advocate of U.S. cap-and-trade system. Lay, Horner explained, had hoped that then now-defunct energy giant could profit from a cap-and-trade scheme once it was up and operational.
After the testimony, state Rep. Brian King, the House Republican leader, tried to ask Ford about the Commission’s dubious relationship with its consultant, the Center for Climate Strategies (CCS), but state Sen. Percy Malone, who presided over the meeting, wouldn’t allow the question, claiming that members could only ask questions about the presentations.
One lawmaker commented after the hearing that he was glad the other side of the science on global warming was given a fair hearing. What isn’t known is when lawmakers will be given an opportunity to question the Commission’s restrictive policies and procedures or its relationship with CCS. I suspect the next time the Energy Committee assembles, especially if in the meantime recommendations from the GCGW start showing up in legislation, lawmakers will be loaded with plenty of questions.
——-
David Sanders writes twice weekly for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock and is a host of the Arkansas Education Television Network’s “Unconventional Wisdom.” His e-mail address is DavidJSanders@aol.com.
