GOP Gored by Climate Change Financial Gains

Filed in National by on November 4, 2009

Let’s journey back a year and a few months to a time when Sen. John McCain did not recall the number of houses he and his wife had. And supporters of Obama talked about  families having one kitchen table and supporters of McCain said that Democrats just didn’t like financial success.

Turns out some Republicans don’t like financial success at the hands of liberals, especially liberals who are concerned about climate change reports The New York Times.

Critics, mostly on the political right and among global warming skeptics, say Mr. Gore is poised to become the world’s first “carbon billionaire,” profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in.

Mr. Gore responded last year to these frivolous claims with this statement on Capitol Hill.

“I believe that the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it, ” Mr. Gore said, adding that he had put “every penny” he has made from his investments into the Alliance for Climate Protection.

“And, Congresswoman,” he added, “if you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don’t know me.”

Why is this back in the news? One of the companies that Gore and his fellow investors back won a grant in the smart grid contracts announced last week by President Obama.

As Mr. Gore says:

Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country? I am proud of it. I am proud of it.

Tags: ,

About the Author ()

A Dad, a husband and a data guru

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Unstable Isotope says:
    November 4, 2009 at 11:00 am

    I think this is why several high profile companies left the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – there’s a lot of money in reducing the amount of energy you use. I’m sure big companies are doing price forecasting and they are foreseeing future shortages. They are probably thinking they need to get ahead of this. Plus, there’s money to be made in new energy sources like solar and wind. They want a piece of this.

    Even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has gotten the message. They sent a letter to Sen. Boxer supporting “bipartisan” climate change legislation. I consider this mostly soft support but it is a big change from knee-jerk opposition.

    It is time to consider a different approach.

    The challenge of drafting comprehensive climate legislation is not “whether” to do something, but “how.” There are many good ideas out there that can serve as a solid, workable, commonsense and realistic foundation on which to craft a bill. The Chamber commends Senators Kerry and Graham for their recent New York Times editorial on the need for comprehensive climate legislation. The Chamber welcomes the call for a new conversation on how to address the issue, and believes their editorial can serve as a solid, workable, commonsense foundation on which to craft a bill. Many other important details are needed, but the Chamber agrees that the objectives outlined in that editorial, coupled with their clear recognition that “this process requires honest give-and-take and genuine bipartisanship,” can move this important policy objective forward in a bipartisan manner that garners strong business community support.

    Senators Kerry and Graham have set forth a positive, practical and realistic framework for legislation, one that echoes the core principles that the Chamber embeds in all of its communications on climate policy. The Chamber agrees with a great deal of the principles set forth by Senators Kerry and Graham, in particular that legislation should: minimize the impact on major emitters; reduce price volatility for consumers; protect global competitiveness; invest in renewable energy sources; take advantage of nuclear power; streamline the permit system; make us the “Saudi Arabia of clean coal” by fostering carbon capture and sequestration technology; commit to increased environmentally responsible onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration; contain consumer and intellectual property protections; protect against agency regulation under existing laws not written for greenhouse gases; strengthen the hand of our international negotiators; and increase our own energy security and energy efficiency.

  2. Unstable Isotope says:
    November 4, 2009 at 11:01 am

    BTW, money is only good when Republicans make it. They hate Soros and they hate Gore, too.

  3. D.C. says:
    November 4, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    “One of the companies that Gore and his fellow investors back won a grant in the smart grid contracts announced last week by President Obama.

    As Mr. Gore says:

    Do you think there is something wrong with being active in business in this country? I am proud of it. I am proud of it.”

    Imagine that!

  4. cassandra_m says:
    November 4, 2009 at 2:56 pm

    Can’t wait for everyone to suddenly find T. Boone Pickens wrong for trying to shift energy uses and subsidies to forms he has a massive financial stake in.

    The news here is not that Gore or Pickens or whoever is trying to invest in cleaner technologies and sources — the news is that there is real money to be made here and the wingnut obstructionism on this is damaging to what could be a huge market for the US. Huge.

«
»