• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Treason Against the Planet or Treason Against the Economy?

    After the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill narrowly passed the House of Representatives (219-212), Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman, an avid supporter of global warming legislation, expressed his discontent. His concern was not with the bill but those who voted against it. In his New York Times column Krugman says,

    “And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.”

    Another economist, Don Boudreaux, who is the Chairman of the Department of Economics at George Mason University, responded to Krugman in his usual style – a letter to the editor. Boudreaux responds,

    “Paul Krugman asserts that those of us who oppose government regulation to deal with climate change are committing “treason against the planet” (“Betraying the Planet,” June 29).

    It’s more accurate to say that Mr. Krugman is committing treason against reasoned debate. One of the most compelling arguments against climate-change regulation is not that global warming isn’t occurring but, rather, that the dangers of further regulation far outweigh its likely benefits. Government regulation inevitably is a political animal; it’s never guided purely, or even largely, by disinterested science.

    Is it treasonous to worry about the influence of interest-groups on regulation? Is it treasonous to fear that centralizing more power in Washington will result in unforeseen negative consequences? Is it treasonous to believe that the threat to our well-being posed by further constraints upon markets is worse than is the threat posed by higher temperatures?”

    The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis modeled the economic effects of the Waxman-Markey climate legislation and found that it will

    * Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $9.4 trillion;
    * Destroy 1,145,000 jobs on average, with peak years seeing unemployment rise by over 2,479,000 jobs;
    * Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation;
    * Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 58 percent;
    * Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent;
    * Raise an average family’s annual energy bill by $1,241; and
    * Result in an increase of $28,728 in additional federal debt per person, again after adjusting for inflation.

    And the benefits? Climatologist Chip Knappenberger modeled the climate effects of the Waxman-Markey climate legislation and found the regulations would only lower temperatures by only hundredths of a degree Celsius in 2050 and no more than two-tenths of a degree Celsius at the end of the century.

    Krugman also goes on to say: “To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research. The fact is that the planet is changing faster than even pessimists expected: ice caps are shrinking, arid zones spreading, at a terrifying rate. And according to a number of recent studies, catastrophe — a rise in temperature so large as to be almost unthinkable — can no longer be considered a mere possibility. It is, instead, the most likely outcome if we continue along our present course.”

    Distinguished, skeptical scientists writing an open letter to Congress tend to disagree. They write,

    “The sky is not falling; the Earth has been cooling for ten years, without help. The present cooling was NOT predicted by the alarmists’ computer models, and has come as an embarrassment to them.”

    In any event, the scientific debate should be a moot point because Waxman-Markey blatantly fails the cost-benefit test.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    25 Responses to Treason Against the Planet or Treason Against the Economy?

    1. Andrew Chalfant, Mic says:

      This bill is a larger mistake than NAFTA was!

    2. MARK,HOUSTON says:

      They have no intention of debating the issue of GLOBAL WARMING , it's not about the planet it's about social control over EVERY aspect of private life…what we eat , where we eat what we do in our private homes. It will not stop buy expressing our anger vocaly but with the ue of force…unfortunatly.

    3. Pingback: » Financial News Update - 07/01/09 NoisyRoom.net: “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the face of tyranny is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater

    4. Spiritof76 says:

      I think Mr. Krugmann needs to have his head examined. How did this guy get a Nobel prize? Well, considering Al Gore got one, never mind.

      I think his newspaper is the one that should be brought up on treason charges for publishing classified terrorism fighting techniques of the US government.

    5. Ron Thompson says:

      Mr. Krugman is just like all the rest of the warming cult. He doesn't have or listen to any facts that are contrary to his believes. I will bet you that Mr. Krugman is doing nothing to support his view, but he expects everyone else to do as he says. As for the treason, I feel he should be charged for perpatrating a crime against the American people, through lies, deceptions and unproven or supposed fact.

      The nobel prize is just a political tool any more, so I don't put much credit in that credental!

    6. Rich Murphy, Randolp says:

      Sent to the Editor, NY Times:

      Dear Editor:

      In Mr. Krugman’s 6/28/09 column, Betraying the Planet, he equates voting against the Cap-and-Trade bill with “treason” and cites a revised MIT model that now predicts the global temperature may rise by 9 degrees (F) by the end of this century.

      Given that the bill was 1,200 pages in length and that the congressmen (who are politicians and are largely not climate-change experts) had so little time to read it and to digest it fully, I would think that voting FOR the bill is grossly irresponsible – and may be closer to treason. How do these “Yes” voters possibly know what they just did to our country and to our children?

      As for the MIT model, it might be interesting to learn what the predicted global temperature would be if the United States does implement Cap-and-Trade as defined in the 1,200-page tome? In other words, to what end do we do these things to ourselves?

      Thank you,

      Rich Murphy

    7. Pingback: PA Pundits - International

    8. Ben C, Ann Arbor, MI says:

      Hmmm. Given that solar cycles have more to do with climate change than humans perhaps the sun should be tried for treason.

    9. mmcc says:

      Obama's agenda is designed to destroy our government and come in with his Liberal Agenda and have the 22nd Amendment changed so he can serve as long as he wishes. He came from a a well organized organization called "ACORN" that will help him support this Agenda. Wakeup folks we have an enemy within…….

    10. Lloyd Scallan - New says:

      Unfortunatly I must agree with Mark of Houston. It's time to take our country back by what ever means possible, force if necessary. It's a sad day when the common people must resort to this way of thinking. Obama, and most of his lackeys in congress, are being controled by a much higher power that is determined to distroy this country. Because of groups such as "ACORN" we no longer have fair elections. Our votes mean SQUAT! This leave us only one option.

    11. Jerry from Chicago says:

      The cap and trade legislation does nothing to end carbon dioxide pollution, if in fact carbon dioxide is pollution. Cap and trade allows for all the carbon dioxide pollution currently being released into the atmosphere, provided of course, that the polluter purchase "carbon credits" from someone who isn't polluting.

      See there, pay the right people and the problem of global warming due to carbon dioxide pollution goes away. Those investing in "green energy" companies and businesses get rich and the beat goes on.

      At one point in our planetary history, the ice age, we had ice and snow covering the U.S. down to about central Illinois. The ice and snow then retreated to the polar caps. Guess what caused it. Could it have been 'global warming'? Has the planet been doing ok for the past couple of million years?

      Does the fact that several thousand qualified scientists disagree with the premise that global warming is caused by carbon dioxide pollution mean anything to anyone? Why is there no healthy skepticism in the media?

    12. Metalchemist, Califo says:

      The Democratic enforced Agenda is a vendetta against the American Citizenry by Mr. Obama and his hand picked appointees as well as the Democratic Party. The Party of Kowtowing mindless minions, that are bought off with the taxpayers money by the very Govt that's elected by the people. You would figure that as intelligent Americans put the pieces together they would come together as a group to rid this nation from the oppressive, overtaxing Government that is eroding EVERY CITIZENS Constitutional Rights and whittling away at your personal freedoms as they fight with each other over semantics.



      For as Thomas Jefferson said..

      Tyranny is when the people fear the government,

      Liberty is when the government fears the people.


      A government big enough to give you everything is big enough to take it ALL away also.


      Acta Non Verba…

    13. Roy Reed, Las Vegas says:

      Obama is bent on destroying the United States!! I believe we should stop the horrible things the government is doing to all mof us.. We should be drilling here in the U.S. Figuring out how we can use necular power.!! It is cleaer and LESS expensive. Wind and solar are extremely expensive. Very few people could afford to go there…. Any how, Government again, interfereing!!!!!!!!!

    14. Richard Fletcher, Sa says:

      Mr. Krugmann reminds me of Al Gore's home on Earth day when a Nashville, Tennessee reporter drove by his Belle Meade house and captured pictures of excessive lighting, and other excessive energy using devices outside.

    15. Jill Hetherington says:

      Obama gets away with everything UNAMERICAN. I feel like we live in Iran with this guy. The liberal media which dominates television and the press and magazines should be charged with treason. When all the brainless obama zombies wake up and see how he destroyed the best country in the world they will have to see their responsibility in letting it happen.

      I have aknot in my stomach now ever since November 4th.

    16. ken graff, nj says:

      Not only will the cost of all forms of energy rise,the cost of everything purchased will rise also.the cost of transporting goods will be passed on to the consumer.that's a tax no one can escape!

    17. John Clancy, MI says:

      The treason, if you will, should be charged to those who voted for the bill. The power to tax is the power to destroy, and one can't help thinking that this administration is drunk with its power to, not just tax, but to pass legislation that will become an incredible burden on the middle class (especially the lower half). The cost of energy (a basic necessity) will be extreme and the gain is esponentially infinitesmal, a "drop in the ocean."

    18. greyhawk in Alabama says:

      Nothing that this administration or congress is doing has anything to do with the Climate. It is all about Tax, Tax, and about destroying all privately-owned companies, and the economy for the Introduction of an all out move to Total Socialism. Obama is a died in the wool Marxist and he has a congress that is manipulating our system for their own personal profits and paybacks to their supporters, and they are going along with this Socialist Shift.

      The more unemployment goes up, the more people Seek Government Help, including Unemployment Checks and Nationalized Health Insurance. Obama and the Congress are purposely Destroying the Economy for the aim of Socialism. Pure and Simple, and anything else that the Serial Liar Obama or Pelozi or any other their mouth pieces say is an out and out lie. End of story.

    19. Barb mn says:

      Treason against the people of America and all principles. Government made crisis! With more to come!

    20. Charles Webb Va. says:

      The Only Treson is againest The The Tax Payers Globial Warming What a LOAD Crap I'm hearing from Sciencist's It's the Osposite Globial Cooling Remember back in the 70's Coming of the NEW ICE AGE Ice is going to Cover the World We were ALL going to Frezz to Death by The end of the Century Well it Came&it went Now Were All Going To Burn to Death!!! Al Gore Is making Money Hand over Fist And all this Cap&Trade is going to Break US the Working Class Thats Going to be Paying for all This Socalled Saving The Planet I SAY Chop Them Trees Dig that Coal And Drill Baby Drill CAUSE China will when they TAKE US OVER Theres MORE TO COME Just Wait!!!

    21. Ross, Bradenton, Flo says:

      The ignorant, silly, and emotionalist are in the majority concerning "global warming". That means that the rest of us will lose our ability under the our constitution to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What's sad, these fools will not have a clue what they have done. Our march to socialism continues with treasoness acts of our elected representatives. What a shame!

    22. Lynn B. DeSpain says:

      Krugman is akin to the enviromentalist in relation to the developer. The Developer whats to build homes in the wilderness, the enviromentalist already has a home in the wilderness.


    23. Marshall Hill MI. says:

      Larger Mistake than anyone should make!

    24. Marshall Hill MI. says:

      Can be considered why Cal.is a loser,by doing this

      very same thing!

    25. Bob, Dayton Ohio says:

      While I agree that our nation, and our planet, cannot keep polluting our planet and continuing to rely indefinitely on non-renewable resources (such as coal and oil), I do not believe that we can eliminate all of our industries that cause pollution and eliminate out enormous reliance on coal and oil overnight. Moreoever, I think that anyone whom attempts to do so within a very short-term has unrealistic goals; and, I would like to know what this nominee for Supreme Court Judge thinks about Mr. Obama attempting to force these issues down the throats of American Capitalisim while simultaneously espousing not raising taxes and creating more jobs. Does she feel these are realistic short-term goals? If put in a situation where she would have to uphold manufacturers' rights as opposed to compliance with an unrealistically short-term compliance to "Green Legislation," how would she vote?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.