by Shawn Drury
There’s a temptation to cast those politicians who oppose science, particularly when it comes to the environment, as ignorant rubes. That approach is a mistake. The opposition to acting on climate change is well-funded and well-organized.
One of the criticisms of environmentalists is that they have not made it painful enough for politicians to vote against them. It’s much easier for politicians, particularly Republicans, to side with the Koch brothers and other promoters of dirty fuel. Thankfully, this is changing as groups like NextGen and Clear Path illustrate.
But a report published in The Guardian Wednesday shows just how well-financed the anti-science crowd is. They’re awash in green, but not in a way that’s helpful for Mother Earth. The newspaper reported that two groups, the Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund, spent approximately $125 million on “spreading disinformation about climate science and committed to wrecking Barack Obama’s climate change plan.”
Thanks to the behind-the-scenes casino that is our post-Citizens United world,
none of the contributors to the groups need to be identified even
though the amount donated makes up about half of all anonymous funding
to conservative organizations, according to The Guardian.
None of this comes as a surprise to anyone who’s worked on environmental issues in the past several years. But The Guardian‘s important work underscores several key points. First, in some cases, it’s hard to even know who the opposition is because massive amounts of anonymous money can be spent against candidate, thanks to the Citizens United and McCutcheon cases. Second, some politicians’ opposition to climate change may have nothing at all to do with their ability to understand basic science, but instead with their self-interest. Third, as much as environmentalists may find exorbitant spending distasteful, this is the way the system works, so it would be foolish to “unilaterally disarm.”
These points will inform the debate about clean energy as 2016 approaches. Simply pointing to the science will not be enough. Even with the economy improving, environmentalists will still have to make the financial case for their cause.
One of the criticisms of environmentalists is that they have not made it painful enough for politicians to vote against them. It’s much easier for politicians, particularly Republicans, to side with the Koch brothers and other promoters of dirty fuel. Thankfully, this is changing as groups like NextGen and Clear Path illustrate.
But a report published in The Guardian Wednesday shows just how well-financed the anti-science crowd is. They’re awash in green, but not in a way that’s helpful for Mother Earth. The newspaper reported that two groups, the Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund, spent approximately $125 million on “spreading disinformation about climate science and committed to wrecking Barack Obama’s climate change plan.”
None of this comes as a surprise to anyone who’s worked on environmental issues in the past several years. But The Guardian‘s important work underscores several key points. First, in some cases, it’s hard to even know who the opposition is because massive amounts of anonymous money can be spent against candidate, thanks to the Citizens United and McCutcheon cases. Second, some politicians’ opposition to climate change may have nothing at all to do with their ability to understand basic science, but instead with their self-interest. Third, as much as environmentalists may find exorbitant spending distasteful, this is the way the system works, so it would be foolish to “unilaterally disarm.”
These points will inform the debate about clean energy as 2016 approaches. Simply pointing to the science will not be enough. Even with the economy improving, environmentalists will still have to make the financial case for their cause.
No comments:
Post a Comment