Republican presidential candidates are stumping from state to state trying to get their message out to the party faithful. There’s lots of talk about taxes, the economy, and less government. There’s not a lot of talk about issues affecting the environment. In the third of a series of reports on the presidential candidates the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at the environmental positions of Steve Forbes.
Transcript
Republican presidential candidates are stumping from state to state
trying to get their message out to the party faithful. There’s lots of talk
about taxes, the economy, and less government. There’s not a lot of talk
about issues affecting the environment. In the third of a series of reports
on the presidential candidates. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham looks at the environmental positions of Steve Forbes:
Publisher Steve Forbes’ message is popular with the right wing of the
republican party and independents with libertarian leanings: get
government out of the way and let free enterprise get down to business.
When you look at the candidate’s website, you won’t find “environment”
among the listed issues.
Allan Lichtman is a history professor at American University and the
author of the book Keys to the White House. Lichtman says Forbes’
positions on the environment are sort of hidden. You find them buried in
his economic policies. Lichtman says the way Steve Forbes defines
environmental protection is not the traditional way a lot of people view
it.
“So, to the extent Forbes, politically, has any position on this, it kind of is rolled
into his
position on enterprise and he doesn’t have, per se, an environmental posture that he’s
made a point in his
campaign and it hasn’t mattered that much so far because it’s not been a particularly
pointed issue in the
republican contest.”
One environmental issue has been a topic with Steve Forbes: global
warming. During a call-in show on New Hampshire Public Radio, Forbes made it
clear – he’s not buying it.
“I think that the jury is still out on global warming. And whether this is a real trend,
scientists,
thousands of scientists don’t believe that it is, that the data is very, very incomplete.
So, I oppose the Kyoto
Treaty. It would have an enormous decline on our standard of living. It allows countries
like China and
Brazil to a fare-thee-well, puts huge restrictions on us, lowers our standard of living. I
don’t want that kind
of massive concentration of power, lowering of standard of living in the United States and
other advanced
countries on the basis of very incomplete science.”
While Forbes does not often talk about his other environmental positions,
his views are available. Deb Callahan is the President of the League of
Conservation Voters. Callahan says Forbes is pretty easy to track…
“Well, if you read Steve Forbes columns, his own columns in Forbes magazine, he’s
actually written a number of articles ridiculing environmental laws and people who
advocate for
environmental protection. So, he actually has quite a written record. It’s something he’s
chosen not to
speak out about a lot in the campaign.”
The League of Conservation Voters found Forbes opposes government
regulation over public lands, preferring local control of how public lands
are managed.
He supports the Clean Air Act provided it’s implemented in a cost-effective
manner. He opposes much of the current endangered species regulations. Callahan says
Forbes’ over-arching message is that there aren’t any major
environmental problems.
“Steve Forbes actually thinks environmentalists’ concerns about over-population are
ridiculous and he’s called over-population ‘one of the most durable themes of the
save-the-worlders.’ He
has a very strong anti-regulatory approach concerning pollution and public health. He
comes from the
school of thought of, you know, government shouldn’t really be regulating and that the
private sector
should be sort of self-regulating.”
Supporters of limited government say self-regulation could save the
country’s economy billions of dollars. Jerry Taylor is the director of
natural resources studies for the libertarian think tank, the Cato
Institute. Taylor says Forbes proposes letting business find the most
efficient ways to reduce pollution instead of following procedures
mandated by the government.
“Every little step of the way, EPA tells businessmen how to go about controlling
pollution. What Forbes, as I understand it, is suggesting – and I think quite rightly – is it might
be best for business
to be given a standard, i.e. your plant can only emit “x” of pollutant “y”, but that it
should be up to the
businessman to decide for himself how to meet that standard.”
Taylor says he agrees with Forbes’ argument that more self-regulation
would not mean more damage to the environment… It would only mean
less government interference in private enterprise.
Professor Allan Lichtman says in his run for the presidency in 1996, in his
book, and in his column, Steve Forbes has been consistent in his positions on
the environment.
“As a strong supporter of enterprise, generally his position would be that the free enterprise
system is the best way in which we can protect the environment and avoid what he sees as
unreasonable
restraints on enterprise, coming from the environmentalists.”
Many environmentalists say they’re concerned that Forbes, if he’s elected
President, would dismantle a lot of environmental laws. Many
Libertarians and free-market folks say that might be, but it’s also in the
best interests of the private sector to preserve and conserve natural
resources as a way to sustain free enterprise.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.