Tag: favor
Former U.S. Climate Chiefs Urge Political Unity

Former U.S. Climate Chiefs Urge Political Unity

Washington (AFP) – Four former heads of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency who served under Republican presidents urged lawmakers Wednesday to stop bickering over whether climate change is real and start finding solutions.

Global warming is an increasingly polarizing issue in American politics, with most Republicans questioning the science behind it and most Democrats calling for stricter pollution limits.

The debate has kicked up in intensity since President Barack Obama earlier this month called on the EPA to set carbon pollution standards for power plants that would cut carbon emissions 30 percent by 2030.

Obama’s announcement, his most ambitious yet against climate change, also called for increasing global cooperation to curb pollution and for U.S. financial incentives for renewable energy.

“President Obama’s new climate regulations… will harm our fragile American economy,” Senator Ron Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming, told the hearing of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

“Thousands of people will lose their jobs,” he added, describing the measures as “all pain and little gain” toward reducing global temperature.

Barrasso and fellow senators on the bipartisan committee spent the entire first hour of the two-and-a-half hour hearing making their own opening statements, in which they debated the legitimacy of climate science and traded warnings over the cost of acting versus the cost of not acting.

Senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat from California, said she has been called a “job killer” for years, each time she has supported an initiative to make way for a cleaner environment.

“These scare tactics, they have been tried before and they are just not real,” said Boxer, who chairs the committee.

The four former EPA administrators who testified at the hearing included those who served over the past four decades under presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and his son, George W. Bush.

As a group, the quartet penned an op-ed in the New York Times last year that said there was no longer any credible debate over whether humans were causing climate change.

At the hearing, they reiterated this stance, and said stricter pollution limits mean job creation is likely in the fields of renewables, nuclear, clean coal and natural gas.

They also urged lawmakers to put aside their differences and find ways to pursue energy-efficient solutions.

“The two parties were able to rally around a common purpose in the early days of environmental policy making,” said Christine Todd Whitman, former New Jersey governor who served as EPA chief under George W. Bush from 2001 to 2003.

“It is urgent that they do so again.”

William Reilly, who led the EPA under George H.W. Bush from 1989 to 1993, praised Obama’s moves and said state lawmakers need to follow suit.

“While the president has taken many important steps, a full and constructive response is needed from Congress,” Reilly said.

The first-ever administrator of the EPA, which was founded in 1970, said the United States has a responsibility to lead the rest of the world.

“We like to speak of American exceptionalism,” said William Ruckelshaus, who served from 1970 to 1973 under Nixon and again from 1983 to 1985 under Reagan.

“If we want to be truly exceptional then we should begin the difficult task of leading the world away from the unacceptable effects of our increasing appetites for fossil fuels before it is too late,” he said.

A poll out Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News found that while Obama’s popularity is down to 41 percent, matching a previous low, a majority of Americans agree with him on climate change.

More than six in 10 of the 1,000 Americans surveyed said action is needed against climate change, and 57 percent said they would favor a proposal to curb greenhouse gas emissions even if it meant higher energy bills.

Two-thirds of respondents said they either strongly or somewhat support Obama’s rules to set limits on power plant emissions, and 29 percent said they were opposed.

Climate and Ecosystems Change Adaptation Research University Network via Flickr.com

Tobacco Industry Once Had High Hopes For Marijuana Business

Tobacco Industry Once Had High Hopes For Marijuana Business

By Evan Halper, Tribune Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Richard Nixon was in the White House, his “war on drugs” was in full swing, yet Big Tobacco was secretly exploring the possibility of becoming Big Pot.

Newly discovered documents from tobacco company archives at the University of California, San Francisco, show that major companies in the cigarette industry investigated joining the marijuana business in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

The companies were driven then by the same shift in public attitudes that is now pushing legalization around the country.

One company even asked a federal counternarcotics official to secretly secure marijuana from the government for research.

“We request that there be no publicity whatsoever,” a Philip Morris vice president wrote in late 1969 to Milton Joffee, drug sciences chief at the Justice Department’s narcotics bureau. “We will provide the results to you on a confidential basis, and request that you not identify in the form of any public announcement where the work has been done.”

Joffee responded that Philip Morris could skip Food and Drug Administration review of its application for government pot. “I do not feel there is any bar to maintaining the confidentiality you request,” he wrote.

The documents, discovered by public health researchers, were disclosed Tuesday in the Milbank Quarterly, a health policy journal. They not only shed new light on the Nixon era, but appear when some Wall Street analysts and health advocates say tobacco companies may again be considering the expanding market for legalized weed.

“The issues the tobacco companies were exploring are all still there today,” said Stanton Glantz, director of the UC San Francisco Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education. “The only thing they were wrong on is they thought legalization would happen a lot sooner.”

Legalization seemed in the air in the 1970s, though Nixon staunchly opposed it. He ignored a presidential commission’s recommendation in 1972 to decriminalize possession for personal use.

But 11 states would do just that between 1973 and 1977. Jimmy Carter was elected to the White House in 1976 on a platform that included marijuana decriminalization. Views shifted dramatically in the 1980s, however, and President Ronald Reagan oversaw a harsh crackdown that included imprisonment for thousands of nonviolent offenders.

The tobacco companies say the newly unearthed documents are no longer relevant.

“Our companies have no plans to sell marijuana-based products,” said David Sylvia, a spokesman for Altria Group Inc., the parent company of Philip Morris. “We don’t do anything related to marijuana at all.”

Company denials were also emphatic in 1971 when Joseph Cullman, chairman of the board at Philip Morris, declared that marijuana was nowhere on its corporate radar. A handwritten note from the company president at the time, George Weissman, suggests otherwise.

The Philip Morris marijuana collaboration with the Justice Department, he wrote, was meant to explore “potential competition” and “a potential product.”

Another Philip Morris memo, this one unsigned, laid out to executives the rationale for the marijuana research.

“We are in the business of relaxing people who are tense and providing a pickup for people who are bored or depressed,” it said. “The only real threat to our business is that society will find other means of satisfying those needs.”

Company officials say they do not know what ultimately came of the project. Nor do staff at the Justice Department or National Institute for Drug Abuse. No files could be found at the National Archives.

But the project clearly rattled other tobacco firms.

An internal memo from an executive at the American Tobacco Co. reported that his team had learned from a “reliable source” that Philip Morris “was granted a special permit to grow, cultivate and make marijuana extracts … and that Philip Morris urged the State agency people to secrecy.”

Over at British American Tobacco, the world’s second-largest tobacco firm, documents show that a confidential research effort labeled the “Pot Project” was launched in Britain.

The firm’s head science adviser, Charles Ellis, also drafted a detailed research plan to position British American Tobacco to produce “cannabis-loaded cigarettes.”

Cigarettes mixed with marijuana, Ellis wrote in the 1970 document, were a “natural expansion of current smoking habits” and if pot became legal, such cigarettes would be “a change in habit much like moving to cigars.”

He suggested that the firm “learn how to produce in quantity cigarettes loaded uniformly with a known amount of either ground cannabis or dried and cut cannabis rag.”

It is unclear if any of the research was ever carried out.

“The 1970s were a long time ago,” British American Tobacco said in statement. “Today, we have no interest whatsoever in participating in the marijuana market.”

Big Tobacco’s attraction to pot appeared to drop off in the 1980s. But the companies were intrigued again by the early 1990s, documents show, when R.J. Reynolds launched into research on the chemistry of marijuana.

The project was triggered by reports — later proved false — that a French competitor was manufacturing marijuana-laden smokes. An R.J. Reynolds executive also explained in an internal memo that the company needed to better acquaint itself with marijuana “in view of the possibility of its future more frequent use in certain European countries.”

“I cannot begin to speculate on the thinking of management more than 20 years ago,” said David Howard, a spokesman for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. “Regarding the current cannabis market, we are not pondering any expansion or involvement in that market, nor do we conduct any research into marijuana.”

Anti-smoking activists are skeptical. And some investors are betting that their suspicions are well-founded.

“The tobacco companies may deny even thinking about it, but they have to think about it,” said Gerry Sullivan, portfolio manager of the Vice Fund, a $300 million mutual fund made up of alcohol, tobacco, gambling and defense company stocks.

“It is an opportunity to diversify their business and help benefit shareholders,” Sullivan said. “That is what management is most likely pursuing in the dark corners of some research lab in Virginia.”

AFP Photo/Desiree Martin