Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

Rick Edmund

Rick Edmund

Rick Edmund is a United Methodist church pastor in Maryland. He resides on Smith Island, which has been impacted by rising sea-level and in 2007 testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment about climate change and the Chesapeake Bay. ALL POSTS

A supreme decision

Q: What does the outcome of the Massachusetts Senate election mean for the chances of a climate bill passing the Senate this year?

The election of Scott Brown as a senator will obviously not strengthen the chances of passing a meaningful climate change bill this year. I haven't read his position on the issue but if Senator Brown holds to the line of most Republicans, he will be against any legislation that Democrats will propose. To be fair, Democrats will typically favor passage of a bill that speaks to the matter. This is a different situation I feel from the health care legislation, where all certainly agree that something needs to be done; but there is disagreement as to how to handle the problem. With climate change many apparently need to be convinced that it is a real problem that humans have contributed to, and very importantly, can help rectify.

What seems to me to be an even more troubling factor toward passage of legislation is what happened Thursday with the Supreme Court overturning many years of tradition and rulings limiting the spending of corporations and unions in campaigning for a specific candidate. Corporations would almost certainly support a candidate who would be against legislation that would restrict output of emissions, or would cost the company credits in a cap and trade system, or cost them money by requiring improvements to control harmful byproducts.

Some commentators are of the opinion no health care legislation will pass this year, and I fear that the same will happen with climate change. Until the average American person believes that this is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, their senators will be reluctant to vote in favor of changes. Believers in human contribution to climate change have failed to be convincing. Someone whom the American people trust, (Walter Cronkite, where are you?) needs to step up and give an unbiased look at the situation without the background opinions that exist now. Unless that happens I fear we will pass along the problem and consequences to the next generations.

By Rick Edmund  |  January 22, 2010; 10:03 PM ET Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Game On! Bi-partisan approach needed. | Next: Not a partisan issue


Please report offensive comments below.

It is sad that Obama went to Copenhagen to sign away our sovereignty to the United Nations based on this Junk Science. The Global Warming hoax is the biggest Scam in the Last 100 years! Thank God Cap and Trade will fail miserably in the Senate this year. Wake up America! Green is the new Color of Socialism. Green Politicians like Al Gore and John Kerry don’t care about the environment. It has been proven that Al Gore will make Billions if Cap and Trade passes (which it won’t). Doesn’t that sound like a conflict of interest? This is about wealth re-distribution. They want to take American money and give it to 3rd world Communist countries to help Fight the theory which is global warming. Trust the U.N. anybody? Remember oil for food? Wikipedia it if you don’t know what happened.

Anybody that does just a little research of their own on this subject will discover what a fraud it is. Discover for yourself America.

Posted by: Senator_Salesman | January 24, 2010 6:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment

During the 1970s there was considerable conjecture that the earth was cooling, especially since WWII. Global Freezing was frequently mentioned in the press but no one paid much attention because it wasn't tied to a wild political agenda. The theory of Global Warming, on the other hand, has such a left wing face on it that it is immediately suspect. The scientific evidence is in serious question if for no other reason than any scientist who disputes the "evidence" with another theory is ignored by the press or silenced by the political left. Much of Albert Gore's presentation, such as the "hockey stick" graph has been found to be completely false. The left is killing its own cause as it usually does by moving a pushing an ill-disguised political agenda with a "scientific" mask on it and it ain't working out well for them. There needs to be a serious, transparent discussion of this issue by scientists with different opinions. And it must occur outside the political arena.

Posted by: Galasso | January 24, 2010 1:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"Climate change" has been happening for thousands of years. Proof ? Here in upstate New York and most of the northeast part of this nation had glaciers two miles high 10,000 years ago.... check out your internet on "glaciers in New York State", and don't tell this old man that climate change began one to two hundred years ago. This old earth rotates on a wobbly axis, and revolves around the sun in an elliptical orbit, hence the reason that weather changes from year to year. I do not profess to be a scientist, but any high school student can see the simple facts.
Irresponsible statements by Al Gore and others promoting their business schemes and books will not alter the facts, nor will members of Congress with an approval rating of 20% be able to change or convince the people. I would suggest that those people try to convince China or India of their opinions.

Posted by: SeniorVet | January 24, 2010 9:57 AM
Report Offensive Comment

PS A word to all the conservatives who love upstanding corporations and distrust scientists and activists because of their profit motives: How can you see the world so upside down?! Black is white, night is day, scientists are greedy and CEOs are heroes to society? Back here in realityland, every single scientist in the world could make a lot more money shilling for Big Coal, Big Oil, Big Pharma, or some other giant corporation, but chose to follow truth instead. It is YOU PEOPLE who are motivated by money money money greed and nothing else.

Posted by: hayesap8 | January 23, 2010 7:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Contrary to what Fox News (or whatever oil-money-funded publication from which you cut and paste that list) would have you believe, Al Gore has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual science of environmental change. Nor does digging up a list of ten wingnuts presumably with PhDs invalidate the other thousand scientists working on the problem. Thanks for comparing apples to oranges for us there, Senator Salesman.

Posted by: hayesap8 | January 23, 2010 7:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Here are a Few of the MANY Scientists Who Believe Global Warming is Primarily Caused by Natural Processes and NOT caused by Co2.

- William M. Gray, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University [1] [2]

- Sallie Baliunas, astronomer, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics [1]

- Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University [1]

- Khabibullo Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovskaya Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences [1]

- Fred Singer, Professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia [1] [2]

- Frederick Seitz, retired, former solid-state physicist, former president of the National Academy of Sciences [1]

- Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics [1]

- George V. Chilingar, Professor of Civil and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Southern California [1]

- Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa [1]

- Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology [1]

I will listen to these guys instead of Al Gore who thinks the “Earth’s core temperature is several millions of degrees”. Al is also Vice President of the CHICAGO (hint) Climate Exchange and stands to make Billions if Cap and Trade legislation passes. That almost sounds like a conflict of interest? Hmmmmmm

Posted by: Senator_Salesman | January 23, 2010 12:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Me thinks that Cosmopolitan kid will woo the ladies votes what ever the question.

Posted by: eaglehawkaroundsince1937 | January 23, 2010 6:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Post a Comment

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company