In the first two installments I examined Republican MN-GOV candidate Tom Emmer's positions on jobs and the economy and immigration. This time I will look into his statements and positions on environmental issues.
First and foremost, Emmer's campaign website has zilch and nada on it's issue page about environmental issues. Yes, that's right. One of the most important issues facing humanity and he doesn't consider it important enough to mention on his website.
That's because Tom Emmer is a global climate change denier -- it simply isn't an issue, he falls in with the crowd who believe it's a hoax. He characterized Al Gore's efforts to educate the world about the dangers of global climate change as "climate porn":
Republicans strongly disapprove of anyone in their party who doesn't deny global climate change. Take for example, Occasional MN Governor and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty. He has a serious problem to overcome in his presidential bid. In 2007 he signed legislation that would have seriously curbed greenhouse gas emissions in MN. Then he touted the bill before flip-flopping because he wants to be President. This doesn't sit well with the knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers that make up the Republican base.
Similarly, Marty Seifert, Emmer's endorsement opponent, was hammered for supporting this same piece of legislation. While I won't claim this is the reason Emmer beat him at the convention, it was part of the litany of reasons that Team Emmer pointed out about how Seifert wasn't radical enough.
So what other kinds of things does Emmer say on environmental issues? Here's a kooky little tidbit that also exemplifies what a policy lightweight he is:
First post back in Minnesota now that I'm reading local news more closely... Let's be brief, starting with this tidbit from Doug Grow, covering filing day and the differing public personalities of the major party nominees.
"We've got four agencies that deal with water," [GOP candidate for governor Tom] Emmer said. "Health, DNR, PCA, BOWSER [sic] ... Does that make sense? So much duplication."
For the next five months, Emmer is going to drop a lot nonsense like this and pretend he's talking sense
Is there duplication among those agencies? Maybe some, but Emmer doesn't cite facts to show there's a problem. Nor does he pose a solution. He just leaves it to the listener's imagination and limited attention span to figure it out.
