Big Government is a blog that tends to be critical of government. Echoing concerns of the Tea Party, it starts from the assumption that government is a problem, not a solution. Social, environmental, or economic challenges (such as climate change) whose resolution requires using government powers and processes get discounted or dismissed because acknowledging these challenges leads one toward the conclusion that dreaded government actions such as regulations are good, desirable, necessary parts of modern life. If science identifies climate change as a problem that merits collective action, then that science must be wrong. But if science supports that there is no problem, then that science must be acted on, without question, and used to justify broad scale inaction.
Consider the climate science recently published in Nature suggesting that, if the conditions are just right, clouds could be formed by cosmic rays. The Big Government interpretation of this article is a brilliant exercise in rhetoric. It weaves together digs at Al Gore, dredges up climate-gate quotes put to rest long ago, and repeats Exxon-funded Heritage Foundation claims that the politically-abandoned carbon cap and trade bill would have raised the price of gas—all this hyperbola woven together in an effort to argue that climate change is NOT a problem and government action is NOT necessary.
The authors of the study in Nature, as far as I can tell, make none of these extrapolations to global climate change from their simple, single study of bombarding water vapor with radiation generated by the European super collider. In fact, the lead author is quoted as saying: “At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it’s a very important first step.” Dot Earth puts the findings in context and does so without much spin, but frankly that is not what should concern us about this Big Government blog.
What should concern us is that debates about problems such as climate whose solution require an active and capable government are disguised as debates about facts and science but actually are debates about political values and belief systems. Here is a recent study by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication:
- Majorities of Democrats (78%), Independents (71%) and Republicans (53%) believe that global warming is happening. By contrast, only 34 percent of Tea Party members believe global warming is happening, while 53 percent say it is not happening.
- A majority of Democrats (55%) say that most scientists think global warming is happening, while majorities of Republicans (56%) and Tea Party members (69%) say that there is a lot of disagreement among scientists about whether or not global warming is happening.
- A large majority of Democrats (72%) worry about global warming, compared to 53 percent of Independents, 38 percent of Republicans, and 24 percent of Tea Party members. Over half (51%) of Tea Party members say they are not at all worried about global warming.
- Tea Party members are much more likely to say that they are “very well informed” about global warming than the other groups. Likewise, they are also much more likely to say they “do not need any more information” about global warming to make up their mind.
We need government. Go back and read the founding fathers Adams or Madison or look back further to Locke or even to Hobbes and find compelling arguments FOR government. It may be inefficient, bloated, corrupt, and in need of improvement, but government is nonetheless necessary and essential. Abandoning facts, rationality, and honesty will destroy democracy (to see how close we’ve been pushed to the edge, read the laments of veteran congressional staffer Mike Lofgren.) For a democratic system to survive we must all play by the rules of rationality and honesty (at least for most of the time; a little passion is good too!). There are other systems of governance. Democracy is preferable to all of them. But it takes work, and reason, and honesty. Let’s make it work.