Tom's Turn | Perspectives on The Environment From Earthjustice's Senior Editor

Alaska Wants to Buy a Few Scientists

As everyone knows by now, the administration has moved to give Endangered Species Act protection to the polar bear—sort of. The bear goes on the list, but there a big footnote that says that energy development can proceed unhindered. Interior Secretary Kempthorne proclaimed that the Endangered Species Act must not be used to combat global warming.

Various forces, including the conservative Pacific Legal Foundation, pledged to contest the listing in court. To have any hope of success, they’ll need some tame scientists on their side. Read on.
There were reports around the time the latest report came out from the IPCC, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, that prior to the release of the report the American Enterprise Institute, which is supported by Exxon Mobil, was offering $10,000 to any scientist who would dispute the panel’s findings. There were not many takers, it appears.

Now, the state of Alaska is trying a similar ploy. The legislature recently appropriated $2 million to be spent on scientists, if they can find any, who will argue that giving polar bears protection under the Endangered Species Act is be both unwise and unnecessary. As Tom Kizzia wrote in the Anchorage Daily News, “The state Legislature is looking to hire a few good polar bear scientists. The conclusions have already been agreed upon -- researchers just have to fill in the science part.”

This matter differs from your run-of-the-mill endangered species foofaraw in that the culprit is not clearcutting nor pollution nor dam building nor overhunting but climate change, which is making life increasingly difficult for the bears.

It’s hard to see how this is going to have much effect on the eventual outcome of the polar bear saga, but it does seem to indicate that our northernmost state’s lawmakers are willing to squander a fair piece of change on a frivolous pursuit of a lousy idea. The governor, Sarah Palin, has until May 26 to approve or veto the appropriation.

It’s a gas war, let's ration

We are strictly nonpartisan and apolitical here at Tom’s Turn, so we will be naming no names today.

Let’s put it this way. Two powerful and influential figures with overweening political ambition have suggested that the federal government should suspend federal gasoline taxes between Memorial Day and Labor Day this year to provide some relief to people suffering from soaring prices.

A brilliant idea it is, for sure. The figure I heard as I rode to work this morning (on my bike, ain’t I noble) was that this magnificent gesture will save the average American driver just under $30, which isn’t even a whole tank of gas. And here I thought the whole idea these days was to discourage the burning of gasoline and other fossil fuels, which are warming us up and driving us broke.

I’m personally of the opinion (this is just me; don’t holler at Earthjustice please) that gas should be at least $10 a gallon, with most of the money diverted to support mass transit and other good public purposes. I’m also inclined to suggest looking into a way to stop Big Oil from bleeding the public with obscene profits going to their executives and shareholders.

Is it time to nationalize the oil companies? Not sure about that, but paying four bucks a gallon one day and reading about another record-setting quarter for Exxon the next does not make one smile. As I said, I’m not for cheap gas and I’m not for enriching oil companies.

I also realize that there are hard-working people who depend utterly on their vehicles to earn their livings. In the long run, the economy will adjust to minimize those jobs, have the vehicles powered by something other than gasoline, and so on.

In the meantime, what about bringing back rationing? It worked in World War II, as some of us remember. Everyone would be entitled to a small ration of moderately priced fuel. Those who don’t need their full ration can sell the leftover coupons to Hummer owners for whatever the market can bear. Just might help. Makes at least as much sense as repealing the gas tax for a few months.

Color of most politicians: sickly green

We don’t get very many comments here at Tom’s Turn—please comment!-so when we do, we pay attention. To this one, for example, from Brenda Hixenbaugh:

“Considering the track records of certain officials, isn't it time that we get people elected who are directly connected to all of this planet’s and our needs? Surely there are a great number of environmentalists who are qualified for all of these jobs, up to and not excluding the presidency?”

A very good question. The answer, of course, is yes and no. Politics, as they say, is the art of the possible, the art of compromise. As my mentor, Dave Brower, always said, environmentalists ought to be nearly absolute in their policies and positions and leave the compromising to the politicians.

Yes, of course we must put the very best possible people into offices from top to bottom, but we must not be surprised when they begin to backslide. Politics is an ugly business in the end—horse trading, quid pro quo, deal-making.

And the pressure is almost unimaginable—pressure from corporations wielding vast wealth and influence, pressure from interest groups with a thousand conflicting agendas. Just look at Obama and Clinton—their environmental platforms look pretty darn great (especially compared with what we’ve had to endure for seven-plus years)—until you get to coal. Obama has coal interests in his home state and Clinton found a way to equivocate on mountaintop removal mining.

High-minded people who go into government do so at their peril. It ain’t easy. And we, the pure of heart, must stay vigilant and alert to help our friends who do make that decision avoid too many damaging compromises.

I’ve known one fellow (I’m sure there are plenty of others—send a comment and nominate some) who went into government and kept his soul intact. He is Huey Johnson, the founder of the Trust for Public Land, who was the Secretary of Resources when Jerry Brown was governor of California. That’s a pressure-packed job if there ever was one, but so far as I know Huey never put a foot wrong.

So yes, Ms. Hixenbaugh, vote for the strongest environmental candidate you can, but before you decide to run for office or urge your friends or heroes to do so, know that it’s a fabulously difficult and lonely job.