opinion

Marco Rubio's economic disinformation on climate change

Dramatic differences in substance characterized the Republican and Democratic CNN debates.

Runaway falsehoods, beyond simple error, permeated the Republican debate.

Mr. Trump’s revival of the long-debunked fable about the lovely child who suddenly became autistic after her measles shot, and Ms. Fiorina’s lie about Mrs. Fretz’ stillborn baby’s “beating heart,” which was not the result of an abortion at Planned Parenthood, were certainly outrageous.

But believing Marco Rubio’s claim about climate change can cause real harm to the country and planet.

While Gov. Chris Christie and Fiorina denied that climate change was a problem the U.S. should deal with, Rubio grabbed the most air time with the latest fallacious Republican talking point.

“We’re not gonna destroy our economy the way the left-wing government wants to," Rubio said in the second GOP debate in September at the Ronald Reagan Library in California. "We are not gonna make America a harder place to create jobs in order to pursue policies that will do absolutely nothing, nothing to change our climate.”

Rubio invoked “thousands of lost jobs and billions of lost GNP to reduce carbon emissions,” repeating the same claim from earlier this year: “I can tell you with certainty that reducing carbon emissions would have a devastating effect on our economy.”

Absolutely proven false! Mr. Rubio plays ventriloquist’s dummy for the fossil fuel sectors of the economy — petroleum and coal — which have been backing disinformation with large political contributions for decades.

Their messaging has evolved from denial of climate change to specious economic impacts during the current campaign season.

Even the fossil fuel industries are no longer willing to dispute the 2014 definitive conclusions of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, Third National Climate Assessment: “Evidence for climate change abounds. ... Taken together, this evidence tells an unambiguous story: the planet is warming[;] ... this warming has been driven primarily by human activity.”

In contrast Democratic candidates all asserted that climate change must be mitigated. Besides the scientific reality, it makes economic sense to reduce carbon emissions.

Recent studies by Resources for the Future (RFF), the most reliable, disinterested organization for environmental economic analysis, show that policies to reduce carbon emissions would cause job losses in the fuel producing sectors that are offset by a shift in employment to nonpolluting sectors — including cleaner fuels.

For example a carbon tax would boost the prices of carbon-intensive goods, causing demand shifts to cleaner substitutes, thereby creating new jobs.

The net effect on job loss is virtually nil for the preferred policies; unemployment rates rise by 0.02 and 0.04 percent. Phasing in the carbon reduction over time provides money for buyouts and retraining. Mr. Rubio’s claim of thousands of lost jobs and billions of lost GNP just is not true.

The small economic effect of policies to reduce climate change is only one side of the evaluation.

The do-nothing Republican plan has catastrophic consequences, some of which already are evident in worsening droughts and unprecedented climatic events.

The economic benefits of reducing carbon emissions over the rest of this century are well-studied and overwhelming. Hammering the costs of mitigation policies without the benefits is deceptive.

Even China recently announced policies to reduce carbon emissions. Does Mr. Rubio really believe that the do-nothing policy is intelligent leadership? Do voters?

In his prior job as speaker for the Florida House, Rubio advocated for Florida to pursue “bold energy policies,” favoring the federal cap and trade approach.

His reversal reveals a jaundiced view of the national Republican base as ignorant.

To whom is he pandering at high cost to society?

William W. Wade, Ph. D., is an economist who resides in Franklin.