On the recordJune 10, 2010
I rise in strong opposition to the Murkowski resolution which, sadly, is sponsored by virtually the entire Republican caucus, which would overturn EPA's endangerment finding under the Clean Air Act that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to the public health and welfare. This resolution is not about whether EPA or Congress should regulate greenhouse gas emissions. What this resolution is about is whether we go forward in public policy based on science or based on politics. That is what this resolution is about. I have a very hard time understanding where all of this antiscience sentiment is coming from. If an American gets sick and goes to a doctor, she does not worry about whether that doctor is a Republican or a Democrat, whether the doctor is conservative or progressive. The concern is that the physician is well trained by a certified academic institution and has the scientific knowledge needed to treat the ailment. That is what Americans go to doctors for. It is not a political issue. It is a matter of science and biology, of the best medical treatment available. But somehow when we talk about global warming, we do not have to worry about the science, we do not have to worry about what the leading experts and scientific institutions all over the world are telling us. For whatever reason, this discussion about global warming is now political, not scientific. This is absurd.
