Left-leaning politicians and extremist environmental groups love to attack Republicans as the anti-science party, demonstrated most often these days by trotting out the tired cliché “climate-denier” for anyone who dares suggest that massive government spending may not be the only way to address climate change issues.
Of course, these same liberals claim purity in their own motives – their policies are always based on science, not on politics or the demands of their special interests.
Except when they are not.
Consider the push by Jay Inslee and his Democrat carbon-cutting cohorts in the state legislature to throw untold millions of your tax dollars at trying to reduce carbon emissions in the state, released yesterday in a draft proposal for legislative action.
Never mind that Washington leads the nation in generating clean hydro-electric power, and is already on a path to retire the one coal-burning plant in the state. Democrats can’t allow simple facts like those to get in the way of their religious zeal to cut carbon at any price (as long as that price is paid by consumers in our state).
Todd Myers, the nationally-recognized environmental issues expert at the Washington Policy Center, lays out a damning case for the Inslee proposal being anything but based on science. He goes point-by-point through the proposal he charitably calls “fairly vague”, pointing out how each of the eight ideas suggested by the Democrats fail to meet their own stated goal of a program of actions that “maximizes the benefits and minimizes the costs of implementation”.
Science be damned, and cost-benefit analysis be ignored by Inslee’s crew. They have the world to save, one emission at a time.