GOP leader: the idea that CO2 is harmful to environment is “almost comical” 5

Here’s Rep. John Boehner, the Republican leader in the House, talking to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos today: “George, the idea that carbon dioxide is a carcinogen that is harmful to our environment is almost comical. Every time we exhale, we exhale carbon dioxide. Every cow in the world, you know, when they do what they do, you’ve got more carbon dioxide.”

More sweet goodness below:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you then about energy. We showed your statement on the president’s decision through the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. Also, you’ve come out against the president’s proposal to cap-and-trade carbon emissions. So what is the Republican answer to climate change? Is it a problem? Do you have a plan to address it?

BOEHNER: George, we believe that our—all of the above energy strategy from last year continues to be the right approach on energy. That we ought to make sure that we have new sources of energy, green energy, but we need nuclear energy, we need other types of alternatives, and, yes, we need American-made oil and gas.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But that doesn’t do anything when it comes to emissions, sir.

BOEHNER: When it comes to the issue of climate change, George, it’s pretty clear that if we don’t work with other industrialized nations around the world, what’s going to happen is that we’re going to ship millions of American jobs overseas. We have to deal with this in a responsible way.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So what is the responsible way? That’s my question. What is the Republican plan to deal with carbon emissions, which every major scientific organization has said is contributing to climate change?

BOEHNER: George, the idea that carbon dioxide is a carcinogen that is harmful to our environment is almost comical. Every time we exhale, we exhale carbon dioxide. Every cow in the world, you know, when they do what they do, you’ve got more carbon dioxide. And so I think it’s clear…

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you don’t believe that greenhouse gases are a problem in creating climate change?

BOEHNER: ... we’ve had climate change over the last 100 years—listen, it’s clear we’ve had change in our climate. The question is how much does man have to do with it, and what is the proper way to deal with this? We can’t do it alone as one nation. If we got India, China and other industrialized countries not working with us, all we’re going to do is ship millions of American jobs overseas.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it sounds like from what you’re saying that you don’t believe that Republicans need to come up with a plan to control carbon emissions? You’re suggesting it’s not that big of a problem, even though the scientific consensus is that it has contributed to the climate change.

BOEHNER: I think it is—I think it is an issue. The question is, what is the proper answer and the responsible answer?

STEPHANOPOULOS: And what is the answer? That’s what I’m trying to get at.

BOEHNER: George, I think everyone in America is looking for the proper answer. We don’t want to raise taxes, $1.5 to $2 trillion like the administration is proposing, and we don’t want to ship millions of American jobs overseas. And so we’ve got to find ways to work toward this solution to this problem without risking the future for our kids and grandkids.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you are committed to coming up with a plan?

BOEHNER: I think you’ll see a plan from us. Just like you’ve seen a plan from us on the stimulus bill and a better plan on the budget.

Video courtesy Boehner’s YouTube page:

Chip Giller is founder and president of that crazy organization Grist.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. GreyFlcn Posted 3:33 pm
    19 Apr 2009

    Well, the idea that we're complaining about CO2 being carcinogenic is comical :P
  2. adfasfdasfd Posted 4:12 pm
    19 Apr 2009

    Absolutely hilarious.  His claim that they will come up with a plan just like their stimulus and budget "plans" only adds to the comedy.  Or at least, it would if he didn't have a vote in the Congress.It's perfectly reasonable to argue about what the best response to global warming is.  You could, for instance, possibly argue that it's better (more cost-effective, for example) to simply pay to move affected people from low-lying areas and places where crops will fail than to price carbon.  And one could even argue that it's simply too late to make a qualitative change in the results of global warming and our best bet at this point is simply to find ways to mitigate the damage.  But denying that carbon emission cause global warming, or that climate change is in fact affected by humans, is, at this stage, not a very honest argument.
  3. Christopher S. Johnson's avatar

    Christopher S. Johnson Posted 5:06 pm
    19 Apr 2009

    Did you notice he was contradicting himself a lot?  That means he's not actually practiced at denying the problem.  It means he actually doesn't think about it at all.  This is much less sophisticated than a conspiracy against CO2 legislation.  Its willful ignorance.  Its not a purposeful enemy, but a dangerous clown.Its a Greek tragedy being played out.
  4. Clifford Wells's avatar

    Clifford Wells Posted 9:05 pm
    19 Apr 2009

    Once again, Grist comes through with another hilarious boner to make me laugh - I mean, pass the wipes for the keyboard and monitor, please!  One shouldn't drink beer and read Grist sometimes I guess.
  5. sindark's avatar

    sindark Posted 1:27 pm
    20 Apr 2009

    Politicians certainly don't need to be scientists themselves, but
    they really do need to be able to seek out decent scientific advice and
    understand the politically salient implications of it.Obviously, some Republicans (and probably some Democrats too) are a long way from that ideal.

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement