Kreutzer, D

<p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">see econ bad trinity</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">ryan jackson cos epa? kid killer leukemia?</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">lost carbon tax debate w/ jmt from iccc vs laffer inglis</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-foundation-think-tank.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">
</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-foundation-think-tank.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/magazine/trump-government-heritage-foundation-think-tank.html</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">nyt</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">heritage, demint dunlop:</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Today it is clear that for all the chaos and churn of the current administration, Heritage has achieved a huge strategic victory. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Those who worked on the project estimate that hundreds of the people the think tank put forward landed jobs, in just about every government agency.</span><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> Heritage’s recommendations included some of the most prominent members of Trump’s cabinet:</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"> Scott Pruitt, </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Betsy DeVos (</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">whose in-laws endowed Heritage’s Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society), </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Mick Mulvaney</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">, </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Rick Perry, Jeff Sessions </b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">and many more. Dozens of Heritage employees and alumni also joined the Trump administration — at last count 66 of them, according to Heritage, with two more still awaiting Senate confirmation. It is a kind of critical mass that Heritage had been working toward for nearly a half-century.</span></font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></b></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>“Feulner’s first law is people are policy,” </b>Ed Feulner, Heritage’s founder and former president, told me recently. Feulner was the head of domestic policy for the Trump transition, charting the direction of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Agriculture and several other agencies. We met late on a Friday afternoon, in a sitting room at the Metropolitan Club in Washington, a private social club founded by a group of Treasury Department officials during the Civil War. At his feet as we spoke sat a small box of table cards for a <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">dinner he was hosting at the club that evening for the newly appointed director of Trump’s National Economic Council, the television personality<b> Larry Kudlow </b>— another name on Heritage’s Project to Restore America list</span>. Now 76, ruddy, white-haired and content, almost jovial, Feulner founded Heritage decades ago as an ambitious young legislative aide with a radical dream built on a simple concept. As he put it, sinking deeper into his club chair: “First, you have to have the right people.”</font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">While Feulner and his senior staff had reserved the right to review policy papers, they generally avoided intervening in the research and publication process. DeMint and his leadership team were much more aggressive. Papers were heavily edited or even withheld from release altogether. </span><b times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">Several scholars quit. DeMint replaced them, bringing in as Heritage’s chief economist Stephen Moore, a Wall Street Journal editorial writer and a founder of the Club for Growth, a lobbying group that advocates cutting taxes.</b></font></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">...</font></b></div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb"><b times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></b><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: 400;"><b times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The turnover rates have also been historic. In March, The New York Times reported that nine of the top 21 White House and cabinet positions have been emptied and refilled at least once; neither Obama nor Bush had lost a single cabinet member by that point in their administrations.</b> Since taking office, Trump has replaced more than half of his 65 most influential advisers, according to a tracker created by the Brookings Institution. Christie recently laid the blame for the turnover on what he described as a “brutally unprofessional” transition, saying that proper vetting would have caught a lot of Trump’s most problematic appointees. A number of other senior advisers seem to be on shaky ground with the president, and an exodus is anticipated after the November midterm elections.</font></b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: 400;">
</div><div style="font-weight: 400;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Churn is a central feature of this administration, even for its unofficial staffing agency. Paul Winfree, a Heritage economist who helped draft Trump’s first budget, is back at the think tank. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">So are Stephen Moore, who worked on the Trump tax cuts;</span><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"> </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);">David Kreutzer, who played a key role in dissolving a White House working group that was studying the monetary costs associated with climate-warming carbon dioxide</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 102, 0);">;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> and Hans von Spakovsky, who helped run the now-defunct voter-fraud commission, which was created to find evidence to support Trump’s baseless claim that millions of people voted illegally for Hillary Clinton.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: 400;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: 400;">In a sense, the transition is still going, and as long as Trump remains in office it may never end. “I get calls from people every day who still want to go in,” Dunlop told me. “Or I’ll hear from the White House, or I’ll run into someone at a reception or over coffee, and I’ll say, ‘I’ve got a name for you. I’ll send it along.’ ”</div></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p></div><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BS</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-economic-consequences-waxman-markey-analysis-the-american-clean-energy-and">https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-economic-consequences-waxman-markey-analysis-the-american-clean-energy-and</a></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The Economic Consequences of Waxman-Markey</b>: An Analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009August 6, 2009 34 min read Download Report</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Authors:</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">David Kreutzer</b>,<b> Nicolas Loris</b>, Ben Lieberman, Karen Campbell and William Beach</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After a truncated debate and last-minute changes, the House of Representatives narrowly passed climate-change legislation on June 26, 2009, designed by Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Edward Markey (D-MA). The 1,427-page bill would restrict greenhouse gas emissions from industry, mainly carbon dioxide from the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas.</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Since energy is the lifeblood of the American economy, 85 percent of which comes from CO2-emitting fossil fuels, the Waxman-Markey bill represents an extraordinary level of economic interference by the federal government. For this reason, it is important for policymakers to have a sense of the economic impact that accompanies any environmental benefits.</b>[1]</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Analysis by The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis (CDA) makes clear that Waxman-Markey promises serious perils for the American economy for the years and decades ahead.</span> Waxman-Markey requires arbitrary and severe restrictions on the current energy supply and infrastructure. These restrictions can be met only through large-scale deployment of still-undeveloped or uneconomical technologies [CCS?] and alternative energy sources.<b> In addition to the direct impact on consumers' budgets through higher electric bills and gasoline prices</b>, the resultant increase in energy costs will reverberate throughout the economy and <b>inject unnecessary inefficiencies at virtually every stage of production</b>.<b> It would suppress economic activity and reduce employment, especially in the manufacturing sector. Virtually all costs would eventually filter down to the American people.</b></font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Get exclusive insider information from Heritage experts delivered straight to your inbox each week. Subscribe to The Agenda ]</font></p><p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></p><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/bret-baier/foxs-flagship-straight-news-show-has-troubling-record-climate-crisis">https://www.mediamatters.org/bret-baier/foxs-flagship-straight-news-show-has-troubling-record-climate-crisis</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx many vid</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Fox’s flagship “straight news” show has a troubling record on the climate crisis</b></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Nearly 88% of Special Report’s climate segments since 2009 either spread misinformation or perpetuated false or misleading narratives</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Special PROGRAMS</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CLIMATE & ENERGY</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">WRITTEN BY ALICIA SADOWSKI</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ALLISON FISHER, REBECCA MARTIN, NIKKI MCCANN RAMIREZ & JANE LEE</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">PUBLISHED 06/16/21 12:01 PM EDT</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Fox News Channel’s Special Report with Bret Baier is heralded as the network’s flagship “straight news” program that firmly embodies the show’s motto of “fair, balanced, and unafraid.” Under Fox chief political anchor Bret Baier’s direction, however, Special Report has failed to meet its own standards in covering the climate crisis and environmental protection, instead providing a platform for many of the same climate denier guests and fossil fuel industry talking points featured on the network’s opinion side. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Media Matters examined Special Report with Bret Baier’s coverage related to climate change and the environment between <b>January 1, 2009, and May 3, 2021</b>. We counted and analyzed segments devoted to climate change or the environment and those in which a network figure discussed the issue or engaged with a guest who brought it up. We then broadly categorized the show’s misinformation and misleading narratives into five different angles of attack -- regarding climate science, the economy, the efficacy and public demand for domestic climate action, global cooperation, and the urgency of the crisis. These narratives undermined, doubted, misrepresented, or otherwise dismissed climate science and/or drives for climate action or environmental protection. We counted each angle once per segment even if it arose multiple times; segments often included more than one angle.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Jump to a section</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">KEY FINDINGS</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">SPECIAL REPORT IS PART OF THE DECADESLONG AND ONGOING CAMPAIGN TO DELAY CLIMATE ACTION</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">BAIER’S “STRAIGHT NEWS” COVERAGE OF THE CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENT ECHOES THE LIES OF FOX’S OPINION PERSONALITIES</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">SPECIAL REPORT UNDERMINES CLIMATE SCIENCE</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">SPECIAL REPORT SETS UP A FALSE CONFLICT BETWEEN A HEALTHY PLANET AND A THRIVING ECONOMY OR MISREPRESENTS THE EFFICACY AND PUBLIC DEMAND FOR CLIMATE ACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">SPECIAL REPORT FUELS NATIONALISTIC AND MISLEADING NARRATIVES OPPOSING GLOBAL CLIMATE EFFORTS</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">SPECIAL REPORT UNDERMINES THE SERIOUSNESS AND URGENCY OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CONCLUSION</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">METHODOLOGY</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Key Findings</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">From January 1, 2009, to May 3, 2021, Special Report aired at least 972 segments covering stories related to climate change or the environment.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">At least 851 of those segments -- more than 87% -- featured false or misleading narratives and misinformation. </span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Since 2009, Fox chief political anchor Bret Baier, guest anchors, correspondents, and guests on Special Report have undermined, doubted, misrepresented, or otherwise dismissed climate science and the urgency of climate action at least 1,333 times.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Of the 851 Special Report segments that attacked or misrepresented climate change or environmental protection:</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">14% undermined climate science.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>
</b></span></div><div><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">29% set up a false conflict between a healthy planet and a thriving economy.</b></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">43% misrepresented the efficacy of climate action or the public demand for environmental protections.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">8% fueled nationalistic defenses of climate inaction and/or misled viewers about global climate efforts.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">more than 5% undermined the seriousness and urgency of the climate crisis.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Special Report’s specific attacks undermining climate science were most frequent at the start of Baier’s run as anchor, which began in January 2009. The show spread nearly four times as much misinformation or false or misleading narratives attacking climate science during President Barack Obama’s first year in office (when climate legislation was being considered in Congress) than during President Donald Trump’s first year. </b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>During President Joe Biden’s first four months in office, Special Report was already spreading climate-related misinformation and false or misleading climate narratives at more than three times its weekly rate of 2020.[SO BS SIDE EFFECT COLLATERAL DAMAGE TO FOX RAISON D'ETRE ATTACK DEMONIZE LIBS/DEMS?!</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Special Report is part of the decades-long and ongoing campaign to delay climate action</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In reviewing over a decade of Special Report’s climate coverage, Media Matters found at least 851 segments that featured misinformation or false or misleading narratives that undermine efforts to address the climate crisis or environmental degradation. Many of these same attacks are also heavily promoted by Fox’s opinion shows, which points to the shared talking points of the network’s “news” division and some of its most toxic prime-time personalities.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>These attacks on science are not isolated incidents -- they can be contextualized within the clear template of industry-funded science denial</b>. As early as 1977, Exxon scientists were aware of the climate’s sensitivity to carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels, but the company spent the next two decades leading misinformation campaigns to question the scientific basis of climate change, lobbying congressional representatives to reject domestic environmental regulations and international climate treaties, and spreading narratives to falsely pit the health of the economy against the need for environmental protections. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>More than four decades after Exxon’s initial discovery, Fox News has scrupulously parrotted its successful misinformation campaigns, despite international and domestic studies overwhelmingly warning of the dire consequences of fossil fuels’ contributions to climate change. </b>Special Report’s complicity in promoting these industry narratives is part of the larger, systemic failure of the U.S. to grapple with the climate crisis, which also includes denying communities equitable access to healthy environments, often at the expense of people of color, as well as the failure to pass meaningful climate and environmental legislation in the last decade. And the same science-denial talking points featured on Special Report have even been recycled by Fox News opinion shows and other bad actors (following a similar blueprint to the fossil fuel industry’s strategy to undermine climate science) to deny the existence and seriousness of the coronavirus pandemic and to dismiss the urgency of finding solutions for this public health crisis.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Baier’s “straight news” coverage of the climate and environment echoes the lies of Fox’s opinion personalities</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Media Matters’ extensive review of Special Report’s coverage of the climate crisis and environmental protections since 2009 found a persistent theme of the program sowing doubt about the existence of climate change and the efficacy of climate solutions. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Of the 851 climate or environment-related segments on Special Report that included such instances, 477 occurred during correspondent segments, 174 occurred during guest segments, and 200 were perpetuated by Baier or guest anchors. Excluding segments featuring guest anchors, Baier himself espoused or allowed 1,116 instances of climate misinformation and false or misleading narratives during the studied time period. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Week after week, year after year, Special Report viewers -- who are promised an objective and unbiased analysis of the issues -- have been inundated with misleading statements that reflect Fox’s opinion-side rhetoric: denying climate science, shirking responsibility for environmental degradation, downplaying the severity of climate change, and recklessly casting solutions as too costly or leading toward a slippery slope of tyranny. Here are the types of attacks we found.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Special Report undermines climate science</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The overwhelming consensus from scientists, both domestic and abroad, is clear: Warming trends over the past century are extremely likely to be caused by human activities emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In 2007, just two years before Bret Baier took the helm of Fox's flagship news program, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international coalition of scientists who assess peer-reviewed scientific papers to summarize knowledge of the causes of climate change, released a report stating that the “warming of the climate system is unequivocal” and that oceans and other ecosystems were “being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increases.” The report said anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions were “very likely” the cause of global average temperature rise, and it also urged policymakers to consider “a wide variety of policies and instruments” to “create the incentives for mitigation action.” These findings were strengthened in the IPCC's next six-year review in 2013, emphasizing that changes in the climate since the 1950s were “unprecedented over decades to millennia.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Despite these direct warnings from the world’s scientific experts, Baier’s viewers have heard a different story: Special Report’s coverage of climate change and environmental degradation has flatly denied science, focused on debunked, concocted controversies that attempted to dismantle scientific consensus, and selectively reported cool weather events to dismiss warnings of dire climate change consequences. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Overall, 14% of the misinformation and misleading or false narratives about climate change spread by Special Report since 2009 have undermined the consensus and conclusions of climate science, with nearly half of that misinformation -- 46% -- occurring within the first three years of Baier's run. In fact, throughout Obama’s first term, Special Report spread two and a half times as many instances of misinformation and false or misleading narratives undermining climate science as it did during Trump’s term. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Within just his first month as anchor, Baier ran a misleading climate segment on January 28, 2009, which cited David Kreutzer of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank funded in part by the fossil fuel industry. </b>Kreutzer suggested that scientists were moving to use the term “climate change” instead of “global warming” to distract from cooling trends and make it “easier” to blame humans for natural environmental variation. In February 2010, Baier himself even claimed that “‘global warming,’ the phrase, has been changed really to ‘climate change’ by supporters,” and he hosted current Fox prime-time star Tucker Carlson to lament that “there’s nothing that can’t be explained by the phrase ‘climate change.’” (While Fox News is still undermining climate science by conflating weather patterns with long-term climate disruption, the term “climate change” was actually championed by longtime Republican strategist Frank Luntz in an infamous 2002 memo advising the GOP on how to cast doubt on the scientific consensus that human activity was warming the planet.) </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Baier has continued to attack the science of climate change by giving climate skeptics’ opinions equal weight to peer-reviewed scientific consensus. In February 2015, Baier ran a segment that cited a “retired accountant, blogger, and self-described climate historian” who baselessly claimed that climate data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had been modified to be “more supportive of those who say the planet is warming and that man is directly responsible.” The segment also cited another Heritage Foundation representative, Nick Loris,</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> who cast doubt on the human-made drivers of climate change and falsely suggested that scientists do not believe policies restricting greenhouse gas emissions would be effective. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In October 2018, the next IPCC report estimated that human activities have caused approximately 1 degree Celsius of global warming above preindustrial levels, which is already wreaking havoc on communities, causing more extreme weather events and rising oceans. The report also gave a more dire warning of the urgency of climate change, telling policymakers they had as little as 12 years to limit warming to 1.5 C before climate change and the ensuing environmental degradation reach an irreversible tipping point. The report gave special note to a change in the “frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of weather and climate extremes,” yet Baier’s reporting has failed to note the potential impact of climate change on extreme weather events. The program even flatly denied the existence of climate change as recently as February 2019.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Special Report dismissed the IPCC’s warnings once again, and Baier ran a segment in May 2019 that quoted </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Marc Morano,</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> a fossil fuel industry-funded climate skeptic who has been described as “a central cell of the climate-denial machine.” In the segment, Morano dismissed another U.N. report warning of mass species extinction as “politics, not science.” </span></b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CitationFrom the May 6, 2019, edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Between 2009 and 2021, Morano’s climate denial was highlighted in at least 10 segments on Special Report, similar to his frequent visits on Fox opinion shows such as Tucker Carlson Tonight. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Morano appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight in April of this year, responding to Carlson’s opening question on the Biden infrastructure bill: “How much of this bill is geared not toward cleaning up the environment, which we could badly use, but toward this global warming theory that they have? How much of it is climate-based?” Morano again argued that a focus on climate change was not due to necessity or scientific consensus, but claimed that it was simply a maneuver to accrue political powe</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">r.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CitationFrom the April 1, 2021, edition of Fox News' Tucker Carlson Tonight</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Special Report's undermining of climate science wasn’t just left to his guests or correspondent segments -- Baier himself recently engaged in the same rhetoric to doubt climate science as a figure from Fox’s opinion side, The Five’s Jesse Watters. On May 3, Watters complained that “the worst part about the whole story” is that “Biden isn’t certain schools are gonna be open this fall, because, you know, he does not have a crystal ball. But at the same breath he says if we don't spend a trillion dollars on green energy, he knows the Earth's temperature, to a degree, in a hundred years. It’s hard to square those.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CitationFrom the May 3, 2021, edition of Fox News' The Five </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Baier attempted to make the same point in the next hour, asking why the Biden administration was being cautious in making predictions about school openings while citing scientific unknowns, but “they don’t have that same phrasing when talking about climate change.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Citation From the May 3, 2021, edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Special Report sets up a false conflict between a healthy planet and a thriving economy or misrepresents the efficacy and public demand for climate action and environmental protections</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Fox News figures and other right-wing media personalities have often falsely pitted the economy against the environment, demonizing climate solutions as either too expensive or a waste of money that will not bring adequate returns in the green economy, in an effort to justify a lack of congressional action. Special Report’s coverage was no different throughout the last decade, with 29% of the misinformation or misleading narratives that it spread perpetuating that false dichotomy or failing to consider the cost of climate inaction, and 43% misrepresenting the efficacy and public demand for climate action.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Special Report often emphasized the immediate cost of climate solutions while also pushing narratives that depicted environmental regulations as ineffective or decried the supposedly “socialist” implications of climate legislation. Almost one in three of the problematic segments identified by Media Matters -- around 273 -- both undermined the efficacy of climate action and portrayed potential environmental protections as hurting the economy. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Scientists and policy experts have repeatedly warned that transitioning to a clean energy economy -- often incentivized through legislation -- is not only necessary to ensure a livable planet, but will also reduce the price of mitigation after irreversible climate impacts take hold</b>. In 2018, the Fourth National Climate Assessment warned that the “continued warming that is projected to occur without substantial and sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions is expected to cause substantial net damage to the U.S. economy throughout this century, especially in the absence of increased adaptation efforts.” Another recently published study in Scientific Reports estimated that the cost of failure to keep warming to a 1.5 C threshold rose “from 1.3 trillion dollars per year of inaction in 2010 to over 5 trillion dollars per year in 2020.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Yet despite the long-term economic suffering promised by increasingly extreme weather and climate disasters, regional temperature changes reducing crop yields, and environmental degradation reducing tourism and recreation, much of Special Report’s climate coverage since 2009 has been fed by fossil fuel industry talking points emphasizing short-term -- and often biased -- economic costs. </b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Beginning during the Obama administration, Special Report relentlessly attacked the Environmental Protection Agency, framing its mitigation efforts as executive overreach without regard to the economy. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In April 2009, then-chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle declared on Special Report that the EPA’s finding that carbon dioxide could be restricted under the Clean Air Act “could hardly be more sweeping because it could affect everything from airliners to lawnmowers and almost every corner of the U.S. economy,” fearmongering that it “has the potential for shutting down or slowing down virtually all economic activity” without mentioning the environmental benefits of the proposed regulations</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In a June 2011 segment on Special Report, disgraced former Fox correspondent Doug McKelway cited the Heritage Foundation's Nick Loris, who argued that President Obama and then-Commerce Secretary nominee John Bryson's carbon emission reduction policies “are intended to raise energy prices, and lower-income families pay a disproportionately higher percent of their income on energy prices,” resulting in the policies “hurting those people more than helping them</b>.” In reality, Loris was pushing an oversimplified view of carbon pricing legislation. A study by the World Resources Institute found that legislation addressing either a carbon tax or cap-and-trade program does not “inherently help or hurt lower-income households.” Its impact depends on how the policy is designed; for example, a small portion of the revenue raised from carbon pricing could be offered as rebates to protect low-income households from increasing energy prices.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>A month later, Angle appeared in another segment quoting both Loris, who claimed that the Obama administration’s plan to increase fuel efficiency standards would “be a significant ramp-up,” and the former chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association, who fearmongered that the change would be costly to business and result in hundreds of thousands of job losses</b>. In April 2014, Baier himself responded to the announcement that a federal appeals court upheld stricter emission standards from the EPA by citing complaints from anonymous “state and industry groups'' that the “new limits on toxins” would “cost billions of dollars annually to comply.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In March 2016, current Fox prime-time host Laura Ingraham appeared on Special Report and mocked people “losing sleep over the environment every night,” declaring that the Obama administration’s environmental regulations were actually “about redistributing wealth and making America poorer.” Baier failed to push back on this absurd framing.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>During the Trump administration, however, it became clear that Special Report was complicit in the demise of the network’s “news side,” serving as an echo chamber of misinformation to advance the GOP agenda.</b> In Obama’s first term, Special Report worked to oppose the administration’s efforts to curb climate change, spreading one and a half times more misinformation and false or misleading narratives about than it did during the Trump presidency, when the show championed positive coverage of the short-term economic benefits of rolling back Obama-era regulations. During Trump’s final year in office, Special Report -- seemingly sympathetic to the president’s apathetic stance on the climate -- spread the least amount of misinformation or misleading narratives about climate change during the studied time period, with only 52 instances.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">One segment from December 2016 demonstrates how the show used misinformation and dubious claims to pave the way for Trump’s deregulatory agenda. Correspondent James Rosen cited the conservative <b>American Action Forum’s claim that “recent EPA rules on heavy trucks pushed the total regulatory price tag over the next 10 years over the $1 trillion mark,” requiring “every man, woman, and child in our regulation nation to cough up $3,080 a piece to satisfy it.”</b> The heavy trucks regulation in question -- an increase in the fuel efficiency standards -- would ultimately have reduced global warming emissions by 1.1 billion tonnes and saved the trucking industry $170 billion per year. Despite AAF Director of Regulatory Policy Sam Batkins admitting that the group does little research to check whether cost estimates fit reality, Rosen assured viewers that “Mr. Trump has vowed to carry a war of attrition to the regulatory beast.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Special Report’s focus on the perceived economic disruption and “<b>socialist”</b> implications of climate legislation has dogged Democratic efforts at climate mitigation, demonizing all legislation -- from Obama’s cap-and-trade proposal to the <b>Green New Deal</b> to Biden’s more moderate 2021 climate plan -- as radical attempts to wreak havoc on the American economy and livelihoods. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Attacking and spreading misinformation about the Green New Deal has been Fox News’ priority for the past two years; when it was first introduced, the network aired far more segments than its cable network counterparts on the proposal. As the flagship program of Fox’s “news” division, Special Report made no effort to differentiate itself from the network’s opinion coverage, with Baier characterizing the deal as “one of the most controversial political manifestos” and suggesting that the expensive price tag would lead to wasteful spending as part of “the Democrats' campaign against the prosperous.” </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In February 2019, Baier hosted Federalist senior editor Mollie Hemmingway to complain that “there is not really a case being made for why you would need to upend your lives, destroy life as you know it, destroy wealth, destroy job opportunities, get rid of massive industries that employ thousands and millions of people, and for what?”</b> Hemingway concluded that polls showing American support for the deal could only be attributed to pollsters asking people if they “want free things,” referring to the Green New Deal’s proposed guaranteed “economic security." <b>Washington Examiner chief political correspondent Byron York dismissed public support for funding the deal, claiming that “the idea that most Americans would think that climate change is a World War II-like crisis is really unlikely.”</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Citation From the February 7, 2019, edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>These pointed attacks on the Green New Deal reflect the rhetoric often espoused on Fox opinion shows, such as by Sean Hannity, who referenced the Green New Deal in relation to Biden on April 20, 2020, claiming that “there are no moderates in today's radical, extreme Democratic socialist party.</b>” In July 2020, Hannity lambasted Biden for “taking his cues from the most radical, the most extreme socialist extremist that this party has ever embraced, the Democratic modern socialist party.” Hannity then complained about the price tag of the climate proposal, exclaiming that it would “turn America into a socialist, bankrupt hellhole.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Baier did not push back in January after Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel used language similar to Hannity’s rants to attack the incoming Biden administration and the climate bill, stating that she would not “cede our country to the far left who want to turn toward socialism, institute the Green New Deal, and remake America as we know it.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Citation From the July 14, 2020, edition of Hannity</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Special Report fuels nationalistic and misleading narratives opposing global climate efforts</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Efforts to prevent and counter the worst consequences of global climate change have to be negotiated at the international level and require unprecedented cooperation between countries in order to succeed. But in covering those efforts, such as the U.S. signing on to the Paris climate agreement under Obama, Baier and his guests on Special Report instead<b> echoed isolationist narratives to undermine global mitigation efforts.</b> Like Fox opinion-side personalities, they suggested that international mitigation efforts are detrimental to the U.S. economy, that they favor China and India over America, and that global cooperation would fail to stave off the worst effects of climate change. <b>Statements that fueled these nationalistic and misleading narratives opposed to global climate efforts constituted 8% of the total misinformation and false narratives spread on Special Report during the studied time period.</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In an appearance on Special Report in December 2009, the late conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer repeated one of the most prevalent talking points used to oppose climate action, suggesting that an international climate agreement would “mean a serious constriction of the U.S. economy, a lowering of our standard of living.” This claim is false and driven by a flailing fossil fuel industry attempting to distract from its own “terminal decline” by scapegoating climate mitigation efforts. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>This line of attack was echoed on the network’s opinion side as recently as this year, when climate denier Marc Morano appeared on the January 21 episode of Fox & Friends First to claim that rejoining the Paris agreement is “climate virtue signaling” that will “hammer middle America, blue-collar America, [and] Americans on middle class and lower income.</b>” In reality, committing to Paris emission reductions and building a 100% clean energy economy would create up to 25 million well-paid American jobs, and clean energy jobs are “more likely to be unionized and come with health care and retirement benefits than the rest of the private sector.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In a May 2014 appearance on Special Report, Krauthammer pushed the idea that international agreements, specifically the Paris climate accord, would benefit China at the expense of American prosperity because China lacked a legally binding commitment to emissions reductions</b>. Krauthammer stated, “As we dismantle the coal plants in our country, China and India together are adding one coal fire plant every other week. The net effect is to shift the U.S. coal energy generating industry from here to India and China. It will have zero effect.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>This argument was repeated on the May 31, 2017, edition of Fox & Friends, when Fox Business host Stuart Varney denigrated the Paris climate accord as an “unequal” agreement meant to “take money and resources off Europe and America” to “give it to other countries,” including China</b>. More recently, Fox opinion host Laura Ingraham expanded upon this argument in April, characterizing global cooperation on climate as tentative at best, with each nation pursuing “what’s in its best interest.” Ingraham then dismissed Biden’s “grand” climate plans as ineffective for failing to reduce global temperatures “at all.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">These are bad-faith arguments and they do not account for the fact that not only has the U.S. caused more global warming than any other country and maintains the higher per capita emissions rates, but it also lags behind China on substantive commitments to renewable energy and technology. Furthermore, climate change and its disruptions transcend national borders and are intrinsically linked to the public health, socioeconomic well-being, and growth of every nation. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In yet another appearance on Special Report in May 2017 dismissing the impact of Trump’s promise to pull out of the Paris accord, Krauthammer advanced the argument that U.S. participation in the “extremely weak” agreement was inconsequential, and he claimed it only made a “marginal difference” if “we are in it or out of it</b>.” This sentiment on climate policy efficacy was also echoed this year on Fox’s opinion side by Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg on the January 21 edition of Fox & Friends. He argued that rejoining the Paris agreement would “cost a fortune and cut almost nothing, so basically achieve almost nothing to fix climate change.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">These arguments exploit legitimate concerns of the Paris agreement --that measures agreed to at the accord will not be enough to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius -- not to garner support for the strengthening of global commitments, but to gripe about the inherent complexities of any global treaty and ultimately erode support for addressing the climate crisis on any level. Despite Paris’ shortcomings, the U.S.’s participation in the agreement — as the second biggest greenhouse gas emitter — represented a critical step toward global climate mitigation. As international markets transition toward clean energy, it is imperative that the United States can advocate for American jobs and workers. Moreover, global emissions reductions work -- in 2016, global emissions flat-lined for the third year in a row even as the global economy grew, partly because the U.S. and China cut their emissions.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Special Report undermines the seriousness and urgency of the climate crisis</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Baier and his guests made statements that undermined the seriousness and urgency of the climate crisis in more than 5% of Special Report’s misinformation and false or misleading narratives around climate change. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>These bad-faith arguments have also come from Fox’s opinion side, which has framed the idea of addressing climate change as requiring personal sacrifice from individual viewers.</b> Special Report suggested climate-conscious consumers should not own pets, should limit their hamburger intake, should accept rougher toilet paper, and should feel guilt for using water at hotels or pumping gas for their car. These segments’ reckless linking of personal consumer choices to environmental protection lets the real culprits -- the 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions -- escape responsibility for the worst impacts of climate change, while discouraging popular support for climate action.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Special Report also followed Fox’s signature strategy of focusing on some prominent people’s actions to deflect from those individuals’ concerns about the climate, using charges of hypocrisy as a smokescreen for climate inaction. Baier dedicated segments to personal carbon footprints, pointing to Obama traveling to an Earth Day rally; first lady Michelle Obama flying to Copenhagen to advocate for Chicago to host the Olympics; Prince Charles encouraging environmental awareness; Hillary Clinton traveling during her presidential campaign; and, most recently, Biden administration climate envoy John Kerry using a private jet. </span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">On the February 4 edition of Special Report, correspondent Kristin Fisher noted that Kerry was “not necessarily leading by example by taking a private plane to Iceland to accept an environmental award.” Later in the episode, <b>Fox contributor Byron York said that “he's got a government plane now, and you don't marry into a billionaire family if you want to fly commercial.” </b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This coverage on Fox’s flagship “straight news” show echoed a line of attacks on Kerry from Fox’s opinion hosts, such as Sean Hannity’s January 28 statement that “it’s almost as if John Kerry isn’t that concerned about the environment after all” and Tucker Carlson’s February 3 accusation that Kerry was being “hypocritical.” These personal attacks and red herring arguments serve dual roles -- to villainize and discredit specific activists while trivializing the urgency of the climate crisis. It is a well-worn tactic, as demonstrated by Special Report, that is used across the network’s opinion and “straight news” programming.]GORE TENN HOUSE]</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CitationFrom the January 28, 2021, edition of Fox News' Hannity</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Video file</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CitationFrom the February 3, 2021, edition of Fox News' Tucker Carlson Tonight</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Conclusion</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Climate scientists have overwhelmingly warned for years that unless immediate action is taken to address the climate crisis, irreversible environmental consequences will impact every aspect of our daily lives -- ranging from an exacerbated refugee crisis to devastating economic impacts to irreversible environmental degradation.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The stakes for news media to cover this issue seriously and responsibly could not be higher as Biden attempts to simultaneously reestablish United States' leadership in global mitigation and advocate for bold climate legislation, while the deadline to limit global warming to 1.5 C draws closer.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Yet climate coverage on Special Report with Bret Baier has been characterized by blatantly false, biased, and desperate attempts to undermine climate change action and environmental protections. Ultimately, Special Report is another extension of Fox News’ climate denial machine, serving to sow misinformation and doubt to defend the politicians who actively prevent any climate mitigation.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Methodology</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Media Matters searched transcripts in the Nexis database for Fox News Channel’s Special Report with Bret Baier for any of the terms and any derivations of the terms climate change, global warming, climate, global temperatures, climate science, climate scientist, Paris climate, climate accord, Paris accord, climate agreement, Paris agreement, climate deal, climate crisis, environment, Environmental Protection Agency, green new deal, climate conference, climate plan, carbon emissions, greenhouse gases, green, Keystone Pipeline, Dakota Pipeline, or energy from January 1, 2009, through May 3, 2021.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">We included any segment when climate change or environmental protection was the stated topic of discussion...</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">2016 herit conf</font></p><h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 1.28205em; margin-top: 1.28205em; margin-bottom: 1.28205em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/David_Kreutzer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">David Kreutzer</a>, Senior Fellow at The Heritage Foundation</font></h3><p style="margin: 1em 0px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A former economist with the controversial <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Berman%26_Co." target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Berman <span class="amp">&</span> Company</a>, Kreutzer spoke mainly about what he said were the economic costs and consequences of environmental regulations. He did not address President-elect Trump head-on. </font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kreutzer lamented that <span class="caps">CO2</span> emissions were not going to stimulate the economy. The debate, he argued, was how much regulations can hurt the economy, which he discussed without directly mentioning Trump's new anti-regulations <span class="caps">EPA</span> chief, <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/scott-pruitt" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Scott Pruitt</a>.</font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="dquo" style="margin-left: 0px;">“</span>We at Heritage were accused of having some sort of denier economic model,” said Kreutzer, who also decried both the Lieberman-Warner and Waxman-Markey proposed cap-and-trade bills for addressing climate change. Both of those bills failed to pass, though a cap-and-trade model has been <a href="http://www.c2es.org/newsroom/articles/carbon-trading-under-clean-power-plan" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">quietly inserted</a> into President Obama's Clean Power Plan, which may never see the light of day in the next administration. </font></p><p style="margin: 1em 0px; font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After disparaging cap-and-trade, Kreutzer moved onto the social cost of carbon, which he called “fiction.”</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></p><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Last week, Doug Ericksen, communications director for Trump's EPA transition team, told NPR that the <b>agency planned to review all of its scientists' studies on a "case by case basis" prior to publication.</b> Employees were also told to "scrub" EPA's climate change web pages, although the administration backed off that charge. Ericksen told Bloomberg BNA that the agency plans to restore full communications rights, including social media, "as soon as possible."</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Until we learn more, here's what we do know about the beachhead team and some notable affiliations, mapped out using the LittleSis platform.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">view this map on LittleSis</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Koch and Coal Connections</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Charles Munoz </b>is the White House liaison to the EPA landing team and was a top Trump organizer in his home state of Nevada. Munoz helped launch the Nevada chapter of Americans for Prosperity, a political advocacy group funded by the Kochs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>David Schnare</b>, who has waged intimidation campaigns against climate scientists, worked for 33 years at the EPA before joining a number of Koch-affiliated entities.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Schnare is director of the the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic at George Mason University, which serves as the official attorney for the Energy and Environment Legal Institute. Both are funded extensively by Donors Capital Fund and Donors Trust. Schnare is also an energy policy expert at the Heartland Institute.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>David Kreutzer</b> </span>was a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a group funded by foundations controlled by Koch Industries</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After working at the EPA during the <b>George W. Bush Administration, George Sugiyama lobbied for the National Mining Association.</b> Sugiyama also served as legal adviser to the Republican minority, led by Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, on the Senate environment committee. Inhofe is arguably the best-known climate science denier in Congress and famously declared climate change to be a "hoax."</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Washington State's Worst on Climate</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Two Washington state officials, described as the state's "most radical small government lawmakers," have been assigned key posts on the beachhead team. Don Benton, who once introduced legislation based on Agenda 21 conspiracy theories, is the Senior White House Advisor to the EPA transition. And Doug Ericksen is serving as communications director for the transition team.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Described by the Seattle Times as "an ally of the fossil-fuel industry," Doug Ericksen was named by Washington Conservation Voters as among the state's "Dirty Dozen" worst politicians.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Ericksen wants to make it a felony for oil-by-rail protests to block train tracks</b>, describing it as<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> "economic terrorism,</span>" although the Seattle Times notes that Ericksen's motive is "punishing environmentalists, tribal activists and others who have illegally obstructed oil and coal trains, pipelines and similar projects." The Times notes, "More than going after individual protesters,<b> Ericksen said the legislation's goal is to target wealthy, liberal donors, such as billionaires George Soros or Tom Steyer and organizations such as the Sierra Club, for sponsoring disruptive demonstrations. They could be held liable for damages under the bill.</b>"</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Shannon Murphy, head of the Washington Conservation Voters, said, "Sen. Ericksen's and Benton's environmental records speak for themselves. They are both climate deniers who have consistently voted against protecting clean air and water for communities across the state."</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Rest of the Team</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Patrick Davis </b>ran Trump's campaign in Colorado and before that was accused of defrauding a wealthy super PAC by steering money to fake organizations "run" by Davis and his friends.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Layne Bangerter</b> headed the Trump campaign in Idaho and most recently worked with Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID), whose website claims that the cause of changes to the Earth's climate "is ultimately not well-understood and is a matter of vigorous debate." Koch Industries donated $40,000 to Crapo's campaign from 2013-2014.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Justin Schwab</b> is serving as the main legal advisor and is currently an attorney at the corporate law firm Baker Hostetler in Washington, DC.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Holly Greaves</b> is working on budget issues and was most recently a public accountant for KPMG, which works with a number of oil, gas and utility industry clients.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Reposted with permission from our media associate DeSmogBlog.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">==</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">bs</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Research Fellow in Energy Economics and Climate Change</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Center for Data Analysis</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">David Kreutzer is the Research Fellow in Energy Economics and Climate Change [ebell?] at The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In this position, Kreutzer researches how energy and climate change legislation will affect economic activity at the national, local, and industry levels.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Before joining Heritage in February 2008, Kreutzer was an economist at<b> Berman and Company,</b> a Washington-based public affairs firm. From 1984 to 2007, he taught economics at Madison University in Harrisonburg, Va., where he also served as Director of the International Business Program.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In addition, Kreutzer was a Visiting Economist at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1994 and was a visiting economics instructor at Ohio University in the early 1980s.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Kreutzer also has some local political experience. From January 2003 to December 2004, Kreutzer served as Mayor of Dayton, Va., a town of about 1,300 people in Rockingham County near the West Virginia state line. Before that, Kreutzer served on Dayton’s Town Council for nine years.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Kreutzer's research has appeared in journals such as The Journal of Political Economy, the National Tax Journal, Economic Inquiry, The Southern Economic Journal and The Journal of Energy and Development.  He has also written for mainstream media outlets including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, the Journal of Commerce, the Cleveland Plain Dealer, and Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel.</font>

<font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Kreutzer earned a doctorate in economics from<b> George Mason University</b> in 1984. He also has a bachelor's and master's degrees in economics from Virginia Tech. Raised in Northern Virginia, he now lives with his wife and three children in<b> Arlington</b>.</font>

<h3 class="false" style="margin: 10px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; overflow: hidden;"><span class="title" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Research Fellow in Energy Economics and Climate Change</font></span></h3>

<h4 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; line-height: 1.4;"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="company-profile-public" href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/the-heritage-foundation?trk=ppro_cprof" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;"><span class="org summary" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Heritage Foundation</font></span></a></strong></h4>

</div>

<p class="orgstats organization-details current-position" style="margin: 0px 0px 1px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Nonprofit; 201-500 employees; Think Tanks industry</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><abbr class="dtstart" title="2010-01-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">January 2010</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>–<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><abbr class="dtstamp" title="2013-07-19" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Present</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="duration" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(3 years 7 months)</span></font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Coordinate and carry out quantitative analysis of energy and climate policies with a focus on costs versus benefits. Communicate the results of these analyses in written form via reports, op-eds, and blogs. Present the policy analysis at congressional testimonies; in conference and seminar presentations; on broadcast media interviews and debates.</font></p>

</div>

</font><div class="postitle" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">

<h3 class="false" style="margin: 10px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; overflow: hidden;"><span class="title" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Senior Policy Analyst in Energy Economics and Climate Change</font></span></h3>

</div>

<p class="orgstats organization-details past-position" style="margin: 0px 0px 1px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Nonprofit; 201-500 employees; Think Tanks industry</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><abbr class="dtstart" title="2008-02-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">February 2008</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>–<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><abbr class="dtend" title="2010-03-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">March 2010</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="duration" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(2 years 2 months)</span></font></p>

</div>

</font><div class="postitle" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">

<h4 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; line-height: 1.4;"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="company-profile-public" href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/berman-and-company?trk=ppro_cprof" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;"><span class="org summary" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Berman and Company</font></span></a></strong></h4>

</div>

<p class="orgstats organization-details past-position" style="margin: 0px 0px 1px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Privately Held; 11-50 employees; Public Relations and Communications industry</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><abbr class="dtstart" title="2007-07-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">July 2007</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>–<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><abbr class="dtend" title="2008-02-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">February 2008</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="duration" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(8 months)</span></font></p>

</div>

</font><div class="postitle" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">

<h3 class="false" style="margin: 10px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; overflow: hidden;"><span class="title" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Associate Professor of Economics</font></span></h3>

<h4 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; line-height: 1.4;"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="company-profile-public" href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/james-madison-university?trk=ppro_cprof" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;"><span class="org summary" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">James Madison University</font></span></a></strong></h4>

</div>

<p class="orgstats organization-details past-position" style="margin: 0px 0px 1px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Educational Institution; 1001-5000 employees; Higher Education industry</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><abbr class="dtstart" title="1984-09-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">September 1984</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>–<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><abbr class="dtend" title="2007-08-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">August 2007</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="duration" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(23 years)</span></font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Taught economics, primarily micro-oriented courses, at all levels from introductory classes to the MBA-level.</font></p>

</div>

</font><div class="postitle" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">

<h4 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; line-height: 1.4;"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="company-profile-public" href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/fda?trk=ppro_cprof" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;"><span class="org summary" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">US Food and Drug Administration</font></span></a></strong></h4>

</div>

<p class="orgstats organization-details past-position" style="margin: 0px 0px 1px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Government Agency; 5001-10,000 employees; Government Administration industry</font>

</div>

</font><div class="postitle" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">

<h3 class="false" style="margin: 10px 0px 2px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; overflow: hidden;"><span class="title" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Instructor/Assistant Professor in Economics</font></span></h3>

<h4 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; clear: both; line-height: 1.4;"><strong style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: bold; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="company-profile-public" href="http://www.linkedin.com/company/ohio-university?trk=ppro_cprof" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none;"><span class="org summary" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ohio University</font></span></a></strong></h4>

</div>

<p class="orgstats organization-details past-position" style="margin: 0px 0px 1px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Educational Institution; 1001-5000 employees; Higher Education industry</font>

<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><abbr class="dtstart" title="1981-09-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">September 1981</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>–<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><abbr class="dtend" title="1984-06-01" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">June 1984</abbr><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="duration" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(2 years 10 months)</span></font></p>

</div>

<p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"> ==</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Backgrounder #2897 on Energy and Environment <a href="http://www.heritage.org/issues/energy-and-environment"> http://www.heritage.org/issues/energy-and-environment</a></font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">April 29, 2014</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Unfounded FUND: Yet Another EPA Model Not Ready for the Big Game</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">By Kevin Dayaratna and David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Abstract</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls upon three statistical models, known as integrated assessment models, to estimate the value of the social cost of carbon, defined as the economic damage that one ton of CO2 emitted today will cause over the next 300 years. In 2013, the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis (CDA) rigorously examined one of these models—the DICE model—and found it to be “flawed beyond use for policymaking.” This study examines another model the EPA uses—the FUND model. As with the DICE model, the CDA finds the FUND model to be extremely sensitive to assumptions. In fact, the FUND model is so sensitive to assumptions that at times it even suggests net economic benefits to CO2 emissions. Consequently, the CDA researchers believe that both models are fundamentally unsound as a basis for justifying significant regulations of the American economy.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Unable to enact cap-and-trade legislation, even when he was supported by filibuster-proof majorities in Congress, President Barack Obama famously claimed, “Cap and trade was just one way of skinning the cat; it was not the only way.”[1] The primary alternative way to skin the cat is regulation by federal agencies, especially by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A disturbing tool used to justify an increasing number of costly regulations is something called the social cost of carbon (SCC) that, for regulatory benefit-cost analysis, assigns a dollar cost to every ton of CO2 emitted, which can dramatically tilt the cost-benefit calculus toward more expensive regulation.</font></p><p><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The regulatory use of the SCC is disturbing because the method for determining the value of the SCC, despite the seemingly sophisticated process for estimating it, is almost completely arbitrary. It is a classic case of “garbage in, garbage out.” Others have ably pointed out the fundamental and fatal flaws in the damage functions of the computer models used to estimate the SCC.[2] The damage functions are the very core of the models, and the models cannot provide meaningful SCC estimates without theoretically and empirically sound damage functions.[3] In addition, the process appears to have suffered from assumptions that are biased to give exaggerated values of the SCC. However, the EPA (the primary keeper of the SCC) appears to be completely immune to these criticisms....</font>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl01_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/03/young-africans-need-economic-freedom-not-lectures-about-climate-change/" title="Young Africans Need Economic Freedom, Not Lectures About Climate Change" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Young Africans Need Economic Freedom, Not Lectures About Climate Change</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JULY 3, 2013 BY JAMES ROBERTS</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Speaking to students during his recent trip to Africa, President Obama said that “if everybody is raising living...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/03/young-africans-need-economic-freedom-not-lectures-about-climate-change/" title="Young Africans Need Economic Freedom, Not Lectures About Climate Change" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl02_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/02/climate-change-white-house-confuses-myths-with-realities/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/02/climate-change-white-house-confuses-myths-with-realities/" title="Climate Change: White House Confuses Myths with Realities" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Climate Change: White House Confuses Myths with Realities</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JULY 2, 2013 BY NICOLAS LORIS</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Heather Zichal, deputy assistant to the President for energy and climate change, took to the White House blog to...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/02/climate-change-white-house-confuses-myths-with-realities/" title="Climate Change: White House Confuses Myths with Realities" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl03_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/01/climate-change-lessons-learned-from-around-the-world/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/01/climate-change-lessons-learned-from-around-the-world/" title="Climate Change: Lessons Learned from Around the World" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Climate Change: Lessons Learned from Around the World</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JULY 1, 2013 BY KATIE TUBB</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If it ain’t broke, the government will break it for you. That seems to be the lesson to draw from other nations…<span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/07/01/climate-change-lessons-learned-from-around-the-world/" title="Climate Change: Lessons Learned from Around the World" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl04_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/27/the-presidents-pro-nuclear-rhetoric-vs-his-anti-nuclear-policies/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/27/the-presidents-pro-nuclear-rhetoric-vs-his-anti-nuclear-policies/" title="The President’s Pro-Nuclear Rhetoric vs. His Anti-Nuclear Policies" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">The President’s Pro-Nuclear Rhetoric vs. His Anti-Nuclear Policies</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JUNE 27, 2013 BY JACK SPENCER</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">President Obama released his Climate Action Plan this week, which laid out his vision for reducing climate...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/27/the-presidents-pro-nuclear-rhetoric-vs-his-anti-nuclear-policies/" title="The President’s Pro-Nuclear Rhetoric vs. His Anti-Nuclear Policies" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl05_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/06/climate-policy-economic-impact-and-cost-of-obama-s-climate-action-plan" class="item-link report " style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" icon-report.png="icon-report.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/06/climate-policy-economic-impact-and-cost-of-obama-s-climate-action-plan" title="Cost of a Climate Policy: The Economic Impact of Obama’s Climate Action Plan" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Cost of a Climate Policy: The Economic Impact of Obama’s Climate Action Plan</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ISSUE BRIEF POSTED JUNE 27, 2013<span class="by-author" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>BY<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/k/david-kreutzer" title="David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D." class="author-link" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">DAVID W. KREUTZER, PH.D.</a>,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/l/nicolas-loris" title="Nicolas Loris" class="author-link" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">NICOLAS LORIS</a>,<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/d/kevin-dayaratna" title="Kevin Dayaratna" class="author-link" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">KEVIN DAYARATNA</a></span></font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">President Obama recently released his Climate Action Plan, which is a continuation of the costly, ineffective policies from his first four years…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/06/climate-policy-economic-impact-and-cost-of-obama-s-climate-action-plan" title="Cost of a Climate Policy: The Economic Impact of Obama’s Climate Action Plan" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl06_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2013/6/four-problems-with-obamas-push-for-energy-efficiency" class="item-link commentary" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" commentary_large.png="commentary_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2013/6/four-problems-with-obamas-push-for-energy-efficiency" title="Four Problems with Obama's Push for Energy Efficiency" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Four Problems with Obama's Push for Energy Efficiency</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">COMMENTARY POSTED JUNE 27, 2013<span class="by-author" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>BY<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/l/nicolas-loris" title="Nicolas Loris" class="author-link" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">NICOLAS LORIS</a></span></font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Stories covering President Obama’s climate-change speech will focus on his vow to reduce (via unilateral executive-branch action) the greenhouse-gas emissions of power…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2013/6/four-problems-with-obamas-push-for-energy-efficiency" title="Four Problems with Obama's Push for Energy Efficiency" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl07_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/11-problems-with-president-obamas-climate-change-plan/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/11-problems-with-president-obamas-climate-change-plan/" title="11 Problems with President Obama's Climate Change Plan" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">11 Problems with President Obama's Climate Change Plan</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JUNE 26, 2013 BY NICOLAS LORIS</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">President Obama’s climate plan would have a chilling effect on the economy, not the environment. Here are 11 problems...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/11-problems-with-president-obamas-climate-change-plan/" title="11 Problems with President Obama's Climate Change Plan" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl08_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/obamas-case-for-action-on-climate-change-doesnt-cut-it/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/obamas-case-for-action-on-climate-change-doesnt-cut-it/" title="Obama’s “Case for Action” on Climate Change Doesn’t Cut It" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Obama’s “Case for Action” on Climate Change Doesn’t Cut It</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JUNE 26, 2013 BY KATIE TUBB</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Yesterday, President Obama announced his climate action plan to drastically cut carbon dioxide emissions and mandate...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/obamas-case-for-action-on-climate-change-doesnt-cut-it/" title="Obama’s “Case for Action” on Climate Change Doesn’t Cut It" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl09_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/morning-bell-things-that-will-cost-more-under-obamas-climate-change-plan/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/morning-bell-things-that-will-cost-more-under-obamas-climate-change-plan/" title="Things That Will Cost More Under Obama's Climate Change Plan" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Things That Will Cost More Under Obama's Climate Change Plan</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JUNE 26, 2013 BY AMY PAYNE</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">President Obama doesn’t “have time for a meeting of the flat-Earth society.” And he probably considers you a member if...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/26/morning-bell-things-that-will-cost-more-under-obamas-climate-change-plan/" title="Things That Will Cost More Under Obama's Climate Change Plan" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

<li id="researchlist_itemlist_ctl10_li" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 25px; padding: 0px; clear: left;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/25/obama-climate-change-plan-war-on-coal-would-hike-natural-gas-prices-42-percent/" class="item-link blogpost" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; display: block; float: left; width: 22px; height: 26px; background-image: url(" http="http" www.heritage.org="www.heritage.org" static="static" css="css" i="i" blogpost_large.png="blogpost_large.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" text-decoration="text-decoration" none="none" important="important"> </a><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/25/obama-climate-change-plan-war-on-coal-would-hike-natural-gas-prices-42-percent/" title="Obama Climate Change Plan: War on Coal Would Hike Natural Gas Prices 42 Percent" class="item-title" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px 0px 6px; outline: none; display: block; float: none; font-weight: bold; width: 565.2px; text-decoration: none !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Obama Climate Change Plan: War on Coal Would Hike Natural Gas Prices 42 Percent</font></a><span class="item-meta" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; float: none; display: block;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">BLOG POST ON JUNE 25, 2013 BY NICOLAS LORIS</font></span>

<p class="info" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0px 30px; padding: 6px 0px 0px; line-height: 18px; display: block; float: none; font-weight: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Remember the shale gas revolution that would bring stably low natural gas prices and fuel a manufacturing renaissance...…<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="more" style=" border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2013/06/25/obama-climate-change-plan-war-on-coal-would-hike-natural-gas-prices-42-percent/" title="Obama Climate Change Plan: War on Coal Would Hike Natural Gas Prices 42 Percent" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; text-decoration: none !important;">Read more</a></span></font></p>

</li>

</ul>