Climate change is not a hoax, but as a political matter, it is a persistent pretext for expanding government control over the economy, redistributing wealth, and empowering unaccountable elites at the expense of voters and their elected representatives.

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

Search Posts

Op-Eds

Lewis Letter to DOE

<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags” />October 23, 2003<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = “urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office” />   Mrs.

Climate

Newsletter

Vol. VII, No. 20

  Politics   Moscow Conference Casts Doubt over Kyoto’s Future   The United Nations’ World Climate Change Conference, which concluded in…

Climate

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