TRUMP THE OILY BIG GUYS

Despite the fact that I believe in holding political ideals, I do have a cynical side. I see politics, for the most part, as an arena in which the participants are trying to advance their selfish interests. They, especially the professionals, have to understand ideals if for no other reason as to be able to rationalize their activities in the language of ideals. Have you seen the ads that one of the energy associations is running bolstering the interests of fossil fuels by pointing out all the “good” things the use of these fuels accrues: good investments for your 401s, all the jobs they create and maintain, cheapening our energy costs, on and on. All of this is couched in the context of advancing the common good. And all of it is not spreading lies; fossil fuels have “fueled” our economic growth, but at a cost.

Science tells us that one of the costs has been the warming of our environment and that, in turn, has led to some very scary consequences. These include extreme weather and rising ocean levels that have been blamed for the flood damage we saw with Hurricane Sandy. Whether all of this is true or not, smarter folks than I will have to determine their validity. What I do know is that relative to my lifetime, I have not before seen the kind of weather events we have experienced in ever increasing occurrences in the last ten years. The rapidity of killer tornadoes, widespread droughts, hurricanes that are causing monumental damage, and stretches of inordinate high temperatures during the summer months are all taking place year after year. Something is going on and my money is on the explanations given to us by our scientific community.

Do you find yourself doubting these explanations? One question you might ask is: what moneyed interests are advanced by claiming the weather extremes are being caused by the use of fossil fuels? I can't think of any that represent much financial muscle. Oh, perhaps those companies that are trying to advance industries that run on alternative energy sources, but they don't hold a candle to the kinds of money the fossil fuel industries control. Surely, they don't have the types of grant money and propaganda facilities the gas and oil companies have. I've heard from the pro-fossil fuel side that a multi-billion dollar campaign is about promoting more expensive energy sources such as solar, wind, and thermal sources. Yet I haven't heard of names attached to such contributions, such as the Koch brothers on the other side. In terms of actual money sources we can identify, one can ask: how could they co-op the scientific community that is employed by institutions whose reputations are highly vulnerable to scandal, our American universities? They are in the business of finding truth and their success is highly contingent on maintaining high standards of scientific research.¹

And who is on the other side; who tends to support the researchers who produce the “studies” that counter the prevailing findings? I tried to find out, but all I found were industry supported researchers. My cynical side has a hard time accepting that kind of “science.”

Now let me digress a bit. I mostly don't like Donald Trump. His questioning of President Obama's birth certificate I found to be clownish and demeaning not just to the President, but to himself. So when I heard that he bought the Doral resort in Miami, I had mixed feelings. Why do I even care? I lived a large part of my life in the Miami area. The Doral golf tournament in Miami is, along with the Orange Bowl game, the occasional Super Bowl, and some other nationally televised events, the times that South Florida can “shine.” This past March the first golf tournament at Doral, since Trump redid the course, took place. Despite some problems – which I'm sure they learned from – the whole tournament was enjoyable to watch. So what does all this have to do with a warming environment and extreme weather?

According to the National Climate Assessment report issued this past Tuesday, South Florida is in danger of losses amounting to trillions of dollars due to rising ocean levels. It happens that the area's topography is flat and not much above sea level. The underground rock is limestone, a porous foundation. According to Broward County Commissioner Kristen Jacobs, “[i]t's remarkable. We get calls from people asking: 'It didn't rain, so why is my street underwater?' ”² Thirty percent of Broward County is 5 feet or less above sea level. The area has an old, in need of updating, water works which counts on gravity to work. Well, with rising ocean levels, the system is having problems and the result is water backup and salt water incursion. And one of the localities being seriously affected is Doral, Florida. Will Mr. Trump's party, the Republican Party, continue to lead the way in fighting public policy that will address the threats of global warming or will it take on the role of organizing the interests, like those of Mr. Trump, that are being threatened by extreme weather? Will they respond only to the interest that is directly rewarded by the status quo or will they take on the task of pointing out the dangers and solicit those business leaders who will find the coming years ever more expensive as they attempt to meet the challenges that weather conditions promise to bring?

At the time of Hurricane Andrew, we didn't make the connection between warming conditions and the destructive power of that storm. Since 1992, when South Florida was hit by Andrew, we can reasonably speculate that that storm was one of the first tangible examples of what we are seeing more frequently. I personally saw what such a storm can do: blocks after blocks of destroyed homes and untold tragedies to humans and animals. To use the word, inconveniences, to describe what followed doesn't do justice with what people had to endure. Since then we have had Katrina and Sandy. What's next?

And this is what I don't understand. Why is it that the Madisonian principle of varied interests does not come into play and check the single or lesser numbered factions whose interests are advanced but which negatively affect so many other interests – even monied interests? James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution,” and the other founding fathers did not trust the masses to produce good governance. They foresaw that if the system they created allowed for interests or factions to compete for favorable governmental policy, no one or only a few factions could control and get government to do what it or they wanted. Factions would check each other much like our three branches of government. But how bad does it need to get for the negatively affected factions to line up against a particular faction that is using its resources to advance those very conditions that are hurting all those other entities?

The summer before last, American farmers were significantly hindered by droughts. The conditions still exist in certain parts of the country. I heard of a local community beginning to recycle “used” water in order to meet the challenges of the extended drought. If the science is true, this is just one set of factions' interests whose advantage is being advanced by the neglect of developing alternative forms of energy. This is a well-heeled set of factions, but a set that is outnumbered both in terms of numbers and accumulated resources. For example, we now hear of the pending consequences to South Florida. We have communities destroyed by tornadoes and we have homes in California and other western states destroyed by inordinate numbers of forest fires. We have drought stricken farms across the country. Eventually, tourist areas will be affected – look at the Jersey Shore – industrial areas will be affected. We will all be affected by extreme weather.

The political question in coming years will be: how many of these devastating events do we need to go through before the party that represents many of these monied interests starts acting like a political party and represents these affected factions' true interests? Come on Trump, get real; your bottom line might have to take a significant hit. The National Climate Assessment states we still have time before the real costs start accumulating, but the costs are already being experienced. Now is the time to organize and target those pending interests that are and will be, to increasing levels, negatively affected by climate change.

1I recently heard that the Koch brothers have “bought” the economics department at my alma mater, Florida State University. I can't help thinking that such a link will undermine the reputation of that program.

2Koch, W. and Rice, D. (2014). Miami: Ground zero for global warming. Tallahassee Democrat (a USA Today article), May 8, (Section B), pp. 1 and 3, quotation on p. 1. The facts shared in this posting regarding South Florida are derived from this article.