CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 22, 2013 12:39 PM UTC

On radio, Coffman says "radical environmentalists" control a lot of climate-change research grants

  • 10 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Responding for the first time to a League of Conservation Voters' ad portraying him as an "Ostrich," with his head in the sand, for denying that humans are contributing to global warming, Rep. Mike Coffman told Denver radio-host Mike Rosen Wed. that "a lot" of the research grants on global warming won't go to scientists unless they submit to the "orthodoxy of climate change by the radical environmentalists."

Coffman: And one thing that I certainly read from viable sources is that a lot of the research that’s being done—when you put your application in to get a grant, if you don’t submit to the, you know, orthodoxy of climate change by the radical environmentalists, you’re not going to get a grant.

Listen to Rep. Mike Coffman responding on KOA radio Denver on 08-21-13 to LCV ostrich ad

Rosen didn't ask Coffman for the specific "viable sources" Coffman read on climate-change research grants, or whether Coffman thinks the National Science Foundation, for example, a major provider of climate-change research, is in the pocket of radical environmentalists.

To his credit though, Rosen asked Coffman at the beginning of the interview, "How come you’re not doing anything publicly to defend yourself?" But Coffman ignored the question, choosing instead to attack the League of Conservation Voters, which paid for the ad.

Coffman went on to contradict his previous statement, quoted in the ad, that it's "subject to debate" whether humans are causing global warming at all

Perhaps tweaking his position in response to polls showing him to be endangered in his new district, Colffman told Rosen:

Coffman: My view is that it’s naturally occurring, number one. But certainly man-made activity influences it at the margins, and I think it’s debatable how much that is. But certainly, you know, we know that carbon emissions are bad, and we ought to do everything responsible to bring them down in a balanced approach between environmental concerns and economic concerns.

Rosen failed to ask why Coffman had changed position slightly on global warming, now saying there's human influence "at the margins," or whether he'd misspoken on the radio show. Rosen didn't ask, after Coffman said "carbon emissions are bad," why Coffman voted for a measure just last year that would have prevented the EPA from regulating carbon emissions.

In response to Coffman's comments on the radio, League of Conservation Voters' spokesman Jeff Gohringer emailed me: “Clearly Congressman Coffman is choosing to double down on his extreme views, and is now apparently going so far as to call into question the credibility of scientists.”

Coffman concluded the interview by saying, "I hope that [the LCV ad] certainly mobilizes conservatives across the state of Colorado and across the country to get involved in the campaign."

It was ironic that Coffman invited outside money into Colorado to support him, after he'd just criticized the influence of out-of-state money, but Rosen didn't burp out any sound of surprise.

Neither did Rosen ask whether Coffman is worried that his extreme position on global warming won't mobilize out-of-state conservatives but instead will affect soccer-mom environmentalists whose kids play at the Aurora Sports Park.

Rosen said on-air that he and Coffman are "friends," and Rosen admitted that he's "biased" toward Coffman. It showed in this interview; that's for sure. I'd like to think Rosen could do better.

View the League of Conservation Voters ad here. LCV released a second ad today.

Follow Jason Salzman on Twitter @bigmediablog.

Comments

10 thoughts on “On radio, Coffman says “radical environmentalists” control a lot of climate-change research grants

    1. Here's an interesting article regarding the evolving position on climate change by the notoriously slow to change Insurance Industry:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/business/insurers-stray-from-the-conservative-line-on-climate-change.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

      The bottomline is that as long as the government protects them by "socializing" the losses from major disasters, they don't have a big incentive to change.

      “Insurers were ready to sign up to all sorts of actions against climate change,” Mr. Muir-Wood told me from his office in London. Then the weather calmed down.

      Still, Mr. Muir-Wood notes that the insurance industry faces a different sort of risk: political action. “That is the biggest threat,” he said. When insurers canceled policies and raised premiums in Florida in 2006, politicians jumped on them. “Insurers in Florida,” he said, “became Public Enemy No. 1.”

      And that’s the best hope for those concerned about climate change: that global warming isn’t just devastating for society, but also bad for business.

  1. "Viable Sources: are probably: Fox News, Heritage Foundation, any Koch-funded group, any coal/oil/gas-funded group.

    Too bad that both Old Mike and New Mike have hidden behind this safe interview with the likes of extremist Rosen, while avoiding public town halls.

  2. " I'd like to think Rosen could do better."

     

    Jason, jason, jason,  What would it take for you to think that Rosen could do better?

     

    What in Rosen's thirty plus years on the air would lead you to conclude that Rosen

    is objective?

     

    1. Rosen is more fact-based than others in conservative talk radio land. It doesn't mean he's not super manipulative or delivering misinformation but he's better than others.

  3. This is the thing that's supposed to disprove more than more decades of climate research – that it's all about research grants, that is, money. Given the pea-sized sums we're talking about, in comparison to the monster profits of big oil and gas, who would you really believe has the profit motive fueling a disinformation campaign?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

84 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!