GOP Presidential Nominees Fire Back at Brown on Climate Change Challenge

jerry-brownAfter submitting a letter-length question to Republican candidates ahead of their first round of primary-season debates, Gov. Jerry Brown has received some responses.

Heated rhetoric

Pressing ahead with the environmental emphasis characterizing his final term in office, Brown asked the presidential hopefuls to outline their own policies. “Longer fire seasons, extreme weather and severe droughts aren’t on the horizon, they’re […] here to stay,” he wrote, as the Sacramento Bee reported. “Given the challenge and the stakes, my question for you is simple: What are you going to do about it? What is your plan to deal with the threat of climate change?”

Brown’s office told the Bee he submitted his question via the Facebook page of Fox News, which solicited questions from viewers of the debates, which it hosted and televised.

This month, as the San Gabriel Valley Tribute noted, Brown hit out against the field again, using a fresh report on July temperatures to lambaste “Republicans, foot-dragging corporations and other deniers.” Surveying the damage to the fire-stricken Clear Lake area, Brown “repeated his challenge to Republican presidential candidates,” the Los Angeles Times reported, warning that “California is burning” and asking, bluntly, “What the hell are you going to do about it?”

Republican responses

So far, at least three Republican candidates have touched on environmental issues in the wake of Brown’s challenges.

Not all their remarks have been directly responsive, however. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker recently took the opportunity to critique “radical environmental policies that stop things like dams from going in so that water … can be used effectively,”according to the Bee.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and former HP CEO Carly Fiorina, who had challenged Sen. Barbara Boxer’s re-election, both addressed Brown head on, the Bee added. While Cruz dismissed “alarmists” as power-hungry schemers, Fiorina took a more nuanced approach; although she first conceded it “may well be true” that California’s drought was worsened by climate change, she also criticized policymakers for failing to prepare for the kind of droughts the state has had “for millennia.”

Shifting opinions

Republicans on the campaign trail have broadly reflected opinions among constituents nationwide. Even in California, Republicans have demonstrated consistent skepticism toward claims that human activity has fostered dangerous alterations in temperatures and weather. In a new poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California, a majority of Golden State Republicans said “they don’t believe that climate change is happening and that they don’t think it will be a serious problem in the future,” as the San Jose Mercury News reported. “They also support expanding fossil fuel production — from increasing offshore oil drilling along California’s coast to expanding fracking.”

Yet the poll evinced some wiggle room on environmental policy issues. Fully 43 percent of California Republican respondents supported stricter in-state climate rules than what the federal government has passed into law. “Californians of all parties said they support increasing tax credits for electric vehicles and solar power,” the Mercury News added.

In a recent nonpartisan poll commissioned by a water policy foundation, Californians seemed to confirm that the drought had become a leading issue of worry across the ideological spectrum. According to the Los Angeles Times, “62 percent of poll subjects said they would be very willing or somewhat willing to pay $4 more a month for water if the funds were used to improve water supply reliability. Such an increase, if applied to the entire state, would generate about a billion dollars, according to poll sponsors.”

Environmentalists divided

Brown’s environmentalist policies haven’t satisfied all critics. His administration’s emphasis on reducing emissions, for instance, has led some to wonder why he hasn’t pushed harder for cheaper electricity rates, which would benefit owners of many zero-emissions vehicles. One objection, recently voiced in the San Diego Daily Transcript, warned that Brown’s policies “will systematically shift profits into a few private hands instead of building, managing and maintaining a solid and reliable electric-charging infrastructure comparable to our utility grid.”

Originally published by CalWatchdog.com

Comments

  1. Without the distortions in the economy caused by the Far Left in their quest of Social/Economic/Environmental Justice, no one would need (or call for) “tax credits”.
    It is time to move government out of the way of a proper functioning economy.

    • “It is time to move government out of the way of a proper functioning economy.”-askeptic
      Absolutely! But your point preaches to the choir. We both can guess how that messsege will play with the Cadillac Bureaucracy. Without the aware Will of the People made manifest in election results and prudent appointments, Californians are receiving the self-abusive results they deserve. Tragically, I am a California native surrounded by them.

  2. Brown and the other “hoaxers” claim tht every thing is cause by global whatever. California has had droughts for centuries, one lasting 250 years! If you talk to any physicist, it can be proven 10 ways to Sunday that the “greenhouse” effect violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics. CO2 does NOT cause an increase in temperature. It only makes up .039% of the atmosphere and any hit by radiant energy is over in a millisecond, and radiates in ALL directions, not just downward! You cannot MAKE energy from energy. You cannot have a “greenhouse” without a roof. There has been NO increase in the world temperature for over 20 years and then what little we have had in the last 100 years is due to natural cycling. The “increase” in the oceans amount to about 2 mm per year so buy all of the beach front land you can afford. I could provide volumes of peer-reviewed papers on the subject but I’ll mention one last thing. NOAA has been tracking the inbound energy (from the sun) and outward bound energy (radiated back from Earth) for the last 30+ years. The outbound energy has been slowly increasing. Well Confused Moonbeam, what does that show? It shows one of two things. Either there is NO greenhouse blocking the little amount of man made energy or NOAA was wrong all of those years. I tend to believe NOAA on this and it shows us how foolish you are! Oh and b y the way, why haven’t you shown cost vs. benefit figures for your “green” programs

  3. When these fanatics say that 97% of scientists say that there is climate change. It is true. What they do not tell you is what most of them say is of course the climate is changing, It has been changing for millions of years and will continue to change. The ones that say that man is causing the changes and it will kill off everyone do not really know what they are doing. They get a pet theory and put it in a computer and model the results. They then say this is what will happen if we do not stop doing this or that. The fact that not one of these models has been correct yet does not seem to matter to them at all. They just change the model a little and start over. If we had believed these idiots back in the early 90s we were told that global warming would melt all the polar ice and water levels would go up anywhere from 10 ft to 100 ft depending on who you listened to and some low island nations would be completely under water by the year 2000. Funny thing none of it happened. The only real change we saw was they quit calling it global warming since that was not happening and now call it climate change. Now we get moonbeam trying to blame the drought on climate change while completely ignoring all the droughts that have happened in the past. Los Angeles is basically a desert. The only reason we have grass here is because we import water. The whole reason we have problem now is that brown and his environmentalist friends have stopped the construction of any dams anywhere in the state for the last 50 years. while the population has increased from 10 million in 19950 to 38 million now. If you don’t increase the water storage to match the population growth you will run out of water.. What do these genius expect to happen? To make it even sillier if you build a dam you also get hydro electric power which is the greenest way to get power.. It make you wonder if the environmentalists and the politicians in sacramento have a room temp IQ between them.

    • How many of these Sacramento environmentalists and politicians does it take to have a room temp IQ between them; what is the temperature of the room and are you taking into account atmospheric pressure, humidity and the volume of outside air that is venting from the open window and the leaky doors? Is the answer all of them?

  4. http://freebeacon.com/issues/how-tom-steyer-the-white-house-and-a-scandal-plagued-operative-paved-the-way-for-epa-regulations/ Interesting article I’m hoping you do more research. This might be the tip of the iceberg.

  5. Bohdan Knianicky says

    Climate change is a natural accruing event. Also known as weather. Whether or not you like my simple explanation, that is another story. First of all nature has a way of cleansing itself…fire. It is a common occurrence in the mountains. Solar energy, wind energy is a farce. Not perfect, not dependable and more research is needed. That the brain dead environmentalists ,LIBERALS, believe in this nonsense is a crime against nature and humanity. Please move to the back of the class and listen to the teacher.
    Name one thing that you, LIBERALS have accomplished that makes sense? Nonsense!…You accomplished nothing at all. We have natural energy, it’s called fossel fuel. We have ample supply of water. We are rich in resources and brain power. You on the other hand are killing the Golden Goose. Stay out of our way with you policies. Let us think for ourselves and let us drill, build, survive and prosper.

  6. facebook_Ken Kambuel.100001104155721 says

    “You cannot MAKE energy from energy.” Yet, the operative word is ‘yet’. And if it were to be shown that it can be done with virtually zero effect on the environment the EnviroLoons would sue to stop it. They want us with pointy sticks scrounging for Acorns and grubs. They’d best consider that there is an increase in Wolves and bears. A pointy stick for digging grubs isn’t going to cut it when they consider you a meal.

Speak Your Mind

*