There is also the constant conflating of climate policy with climate science in order to make subjective and ideological policy choices seem as if the science dictates those choices. But science informs policy, it does not provide objective answers to policy questions. However, those who disagree with the climate policy choices favored by extremists are labeled with offensive terms like deniers.
The Competitive Enterprise Institute rejects climate policies that assume Americans and humans all over the world must sacrifice their quality of living, be guilted into radical life changes, and give up on improving their standard of living in the name of fighting climate change. Even if the United States no longer existed, there would be little to no meaningful impact on global temperatures. Therefore, the myriad of extreme policies are all costs and no gain.
Using the force of government to impose policies that severely hurt humans today, especially the poor, without any meaningful benefits is not just foolish but indefensible. And when such policies are advanced, the proponents of those policies should always be expected to explain how their policy choices would meaningfully affect global temperatures. When they are unable to provide answers, which will be the case, their policy choices should be quickly dismissed.
The best way to deal with any genuine climate concerns is to remove government obstacles that hinder innovation, reduce wealth, and undermine prosperity and opportunity. Economic liberty benefits Americans generally, and at the same time, it is also the world’s best climate policy. After all, the wealthiest and most prosperous nations are far more likely to develop solutions to such problems than other nations.
Featured Posts

Blog
UN report says tree planting can result in more greenhouse gas emissions
It is common knowledge that trees act as carbon sinks. Through the process of photosynthesis, trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen that we…

Blog
Congress can end California’s EV mandates
This week, the House is expected to vote on three important Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions of disapproval that would repeal California waivers granted…

Blog
Earth Day is broken—only private conservation can fix it
With this week’s 2025 Earth Day came the usual media and progressive lawmaker fanfare lauding government programs and regulatory solutions to environmental concerns. But…
Search Posts
Newsletter
Vol. III, No. 1
Politics Debate Over Early Credits Heats Up Support is steadily building for proposed legislation that, if passed could seriously…
Newsletter
Vol. II, No. 26
Politics GAO Report on Voluntary Emission Crediting A new attempt to implement the Kyoto Protocol without Senate ratification is underway. A…
Newsletter
Vol. II, No. 25
Politics Early Credit for Emissions Reductions The latest attempt to implement the Kyoto Protocol without Senate ratification is a scheme to use the threat of…
Study
Is the Kyoto Protocol Dead?
View Full Document as PDF Is the Kyoto Protocol, the global warming treaty negotiated in December 1997, any closer to being…
Products
Could Kyoto Kill?
Whether or not the United States should ratify an international treaty to limit greenhouse gases is the most prominent question in today’s environmental policy debate.
Newsletter
Vol. II, No. 24
Politics Combining Montreal with Kyoto Many issues were discussed at the climate change talks in Buenos Aires this month, but one of the most disturbing…
Staff & Scholars

Sam Kazman
Counsel Emeritus
- Antitrust
- Automobiles and Roads
- Banking and Finance

Marlo Lewis, Jr.
Senior Fellow
- Climate
- Energy
- Energy and Environment

Ben Lieberman
Senior Fellow
- Climate
- Consumer Freedom
- Energy

Jacob Tomasulo
Policy Analyst
- Climate
- Energy
- Energy and Environment

Kevin D. Williamson
Writer in Residence
- Climate
- Energy and Environment