Green Politics and Greenback Politics

Again I ask the question: Why Elect a Democratic County Executive when you can have John Leopold instead?

Leopold is trumpeting the fact that he has signed up Anne Arundel County to be part of the Sierra Club Cool Cities Program by signing the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement spearheaded by the City of Seattle, the full text of which is available here.

The main crux of all of this is to get city and municipal governments to adhere to the tenets of the Kyoto Protocol, which as you know was defeated in the U.S. Senate by a 95-0 vote in 1997 through passage of the Byrd-Hagel Resolution.

And the reasoning he gives for his decision: Al Gore;

Mr. Leopold said he was inspired to take action on global warming after seeing former vice president Al Gore's documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth."

"I saw the movie, 'An Inconvenient Truth,' and was impressed with the adverse impact in the world of the greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide in the air, etc.," Mr. Leopold said. "That movie was inspiring."

That kind of reasoning is appalling. Especially given the fact that Gore's film is politically motivated drivel...

Now despite the fact that there is no consensus that global warming is caused by man, and despite what people from some corners of the universe seem to believe, I am not opposed to doing things to improve our environment. We only have one environment and we as responsible citizens and responsible consumers need to do what we can in order to ensure that we have clean air and clear water. Conserving our resources is a good thing.

But there are responsible ways to do this. One responsible way is to not overreact every time the temperature breaks above 50 degrees in January, because that is not proof of Global Warming. As I have said, there is no consensus on Global Warming. But just because there is no consensus does not give us no excuse to do things to try and protect the environment as consumers. We do not get carte blanche on cleaning the environment because the science is questionable. If I could go out and by a hybrid car (or preferably, a Tesla Roadster) I'd do it.

All of that being said, this Agreement and the Sierra Club program are kind of strange. Sure, we all can get behind things like protecting open space, using energy efficient street lighting, and ensuring the government purchases energy efficient appliances and equipment. Those are things that are economically viable in the long-term. But these plans also include trying to implement Kyoto's agreements on "trading" emissions credits, more government intervention in promoting the development of cleaner burning fuels, creating "walkable" communities, etc.

And now this gets back to the environment, economics, and the county budget. John Leopold has stated repeatedly about the need to find "efficiencies" in government to save money and cut government spending. However, signing up for these agreements seems contrary to everything Leopold has said about efficiencies in government. Leopold campaigned on a platform of not raising taxes and reducing county spending. I'm not sure he can keep his promises while adhering to these compacts. By signing this document, Leopold has committed to Anne Arundel County government to:

• Provide incentives for car pooling and using public transit;
• Support the use of "waste to energy technology";
• Invest in "Green Tags " (the buying and selling of emission credits, commonly known as a carbon credit);
• Improving building codes for energy efficiency;
• Renovating county buildings;
• Practice and promote "sustainable building";
• Recover wastewater treatment methane for energy production;
• Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business and industry about reducing global warming pollution.
  

All of which may benefit the environment, but at what cost to the taxpayer? How efficiently is government going to be able to provide this? And where is the money going to come from? And will any of this stuff achieve the intended consequences or, worse yet, have any unintended consequences that will negatively impact our county?

As I stated, some of these things are clearly workable and have a clear net positive for the county and for taxpayers. More open space means more parkland and less ground level pollution. Using energy efficient lighting and appliances save money on electricity costs. But what about building renovation? From whom are we buying "Green Tags?" Yeah, Plasma arc technology sounds cool on paper, but are it and other "waste to energy" technologies efficient or economically viable?

We all have a stake in protecting the environment, an environment that has been constantly improving since the Nixon Administration. However, we need to take proactive steps, much like the U.S. Senate in 1997, to ensure that protecting the environment does not come at the cost of wrecking our economy. We can have it both ways; there are ways to be environmentally sustainable in an economically sustainable manner.

But I am concerned that the agreement to which Leopold has ascribed Anne Arundel County leads us too far down the way toward too much government intervention in the economy and potential tax and budget hikes down the road. This agreement is the antithesis of what John Leopold campaigned on during the 2006 election. This is not where we need to go, especially given that his whole reason for signing this accord is "inspiration" from Al Gore.

I shudder to think what comes next...