Global WarmingCommentary by Pete du Pont
February 11, 1997
Host intro: Predictions of global warming may be bad science, but commentator Pete du Pont of the National Center for Policy Analysis says that hasn't stopped us from making bad laws to counteract it.
When governments respond to the phantom of global warming, the effects are costly and dangerous. And we've signed onto it.
The U.S. has agreed to binding timetables to reduce greenhouse gas emissions despite admitting that goals established in 1992 are unattainable. And that compliance could reduce our GDP by $200 billion annually. And cost 600,000 American jobs, bump gas prices 50 cents a gallon and dramatically increase the price of food.
It would be one thing if somebody could prove global warming exists. But nobody can. Warming trends haven't changed in 15,000 years. Global warming models are notoriously inaccurate. Most of this century's warming occurred before 1940 when there were far fewer cars. We're putting our industries at a competitive disadvantage and surrendering U.S. sovereignty for no reason.
And if you want more evidence just how screwy this devil's pact really is, we aren't even the culprits. Eighty-five percent of the CO2 emissions come from Eastern Europe, Russia, China, South Korea and developing countries that are exempted from the proposed treaties.
Not every country acted like a lemming. Australia, for one, didn't sign. Instead of dancing to the tune of radical environmentalists, we should be waltzing Matilda.
Well, those are my ideas. And at the NCPA, we know ideas can change the world. I'm Pete du Pont, and I'll see you tomorrow.
Host outro: Just when you thought you'd heard all the bad news about Social Security, Pete du Pont has new information about the system's winners and losers. Coming up Wednesday.