Dear Mr. President

Saturday, June 29, 2013

Dear Mr. President:

Regarding the talk you gave on your New Global Warming policies:

I read the talk and was most encouraged about a number of its aspects. I thought it was a rational approach to the realities of the issues. It lays out an adult path, one that recognizes the value of a time graduated well thought out path of reconstruction and solid movement into the future as opposed to the typical adolescent demands of some of our brothers on the "left" for overnight changes to issues decades, if not centuries, in the making, and our brothers on the right who see any change as the end of the world.

It was reasonable. It made "common" sense. It was not obscured with a bunch of technical data.

I thought, well, anyone who can read will be able to see what is being said here. Then over the next couple of days I read the commentaries of individuals who have their commentaries published in various media outlets. For the most part I could not believe that they had read and were writing about the same speech I read.

One can dismiss a lot of the obvious sophistry the intent of which is destroy   reasonableness while generating fear and chaos. But whether supporting or attacking the ideas you presented most of the observations seemed to simply not get it.

Paul Krugman was the only one I read that even came close to getting it  when he observed that your comment to “Invest. Divest. Remind folks there’s no contradiction between a sound environment and strong economic growth.” ....was simple good sense: We really can invest in new energy sources, divest from old sources, and actually make the economy stronger. So let’s do it."

However, even this remark fails to see the key concept that you presented while addressing the Keystone pipeline in what was an aside. "But I do want to be clear: Allowing the Keystone pipeline to be built requires a finding that doing so would be in our nation’s interest. And our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. The net effects of the pipeline’s impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward. It’s relevant."

Fully realizing that "climate" is a global thing, a condition of nature that knows nothing about our separative national boundaries or nations, this comment outlines and raises to a very significant position that "our national interest" is not a separate exclusive thing but that it involves a global consideration and that the passing or not of this project would be judged on that indisputable fact.  I thought that since you had so obviously bookmarked this concept, it would be easily seen. But apparently not.

This is the clearest statement I have seen that you have made regarding service to the Common Good and General Welfare as being the principles and key determiners for the creation and passage not just for a pipe line but for any legislation. It may be that this position is so unheard of in our present world governments that it was simply not seen.

I am hoping to see many more such statements coming from your administration. This would indeed be change we could not just believe in but celebrate and work for.

lots of love

-tom