Crosspost: Serious Issues . . . Not So Serious People
Crossposted from the blog of the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy.
“God bless America!” That’s all I could think to say when I heard the story of Pennsylvania State Representative Daryl Metcalfe, a veteran of the U.S. Army who last week branded as traitors anyone with the temerity to disagree with him on policy. I sought God’s blessings as a plea for divine intervention to save us from our worst-selves.
The email from Representative Metcalfe has been circling the Internet since he sent it. It is breathtaking. At once he dismisses climate change as nothing more than “leftist propaganda.” Then he asserts that any veteran advocating action on climate change is “a traitor. . . . ” He then goes on to remind readers that Benedict Arnold—the Revolutionary War general who sought to betray West Point to the British—was a veteran too.
I’m assuming that Mr. Metcalf is talking about the kind of treachery obvious in quotes like this:
By increasing our American energy supply and decreasing the long term demand for oil, we will be well positioned to address the challenge of climate change and continue our longstanding responsibility for stewardship over the environment.
Or maybe it’s this:
The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.
Or maybe it’s this:
. . . Common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment. Those steps, if consistent with our global competitiveness will also be good for our national security, our energy independence, and our economy.
I can understand why Mr. Metcalf would want to expose the purveyors of this kind of “leftist propaganda.” So let’s expose them right here—on this blog. The propagandists who cobbled together the above are none other than the Republican National Committee. (See page 35 to be precise.)
So let’s take this head-on. Climate change or global warming is real. Mankind is contributing to it significantly. The consensus of the scientific community is overwhelming in this regard. Even Mr. Metcalfe’s fellow Republicans concede the reality of climate change.
Furthermore, the impacts of climate change will be felt around the world and in the United States as well. Lives, property, economies, and the stability of governments are at stake making this worthy of consideration as a national security issue. (For more on the national security consequences of climate change, please visit Secure American Future.)
My heart breaks, and my concern for the republic grows, however, every time a Representative Daryl Metcalf demonizes someone for disagreeing with him about a policy. The veterans he maligned and insulted are not traitors. They are patriots whose love of country led them to serve America in harm’s way. They happen to disagree with him on a major issue. That’s fine. But our democracy works not because we all agree—but because throughout our history we have confronted epic challenges with resilience and a spirit that we are all in this together.
Frankly, when I read the 2008 Republican Party Platform, I see that same spirit on the issue of climate change. Apparently Mr. Metcalf sees something treasonous.
I run a think-tank—the American Security Project—that tries to forge a bipartisan consensus on complex issues. A year ago, we did just that on climate change in a report titled, A New American Arsenal. Our board concluded:
Changes to the Earth’s climate pose a threat to humanity on an epic scale. Climate change, unabated, has the potential to alter the Earth’s topography; turn currently productive farmland into arid wastelands; expand the areas of the globe affected by tropical diseases; and displace hundreds of millions of people globally due to rising sea levels or extreme water shortages. It is difficult to overestimate the potential impact of climate change on this country’s national security posture.
This was not a one-and-done kind of exercise. Republicans, Democrats, and retired military officers met and, in good faith, negotiated a document that reflected their concerns—both over the threat posed by climate change and the appropriate response.
I don’t believe anyone got exactly what they wanted out of that exercise—but I am confident that the document they drafted will stand the test of time because it avoided excesses, because it avoided insults, and because it rested on reason and science.
I’ve never met Representative Metcalfe. I don’t know if he simply seeks attention, has a tough political fight in front of him, or was simply having a bad day. But I do know that when he stoops to calling people with a different point of view “traitors” and “Benedict Arnolds,” then he weakens our democracy and cheapens the debate.
The issues we face are serious. They require serious debate. And people of good-will will disagree. That is the genius of our system. But let’s make sure the debate remains full of good-will, not name calling. There’s simply too much at stake.
