Opinion: In today’s pages: Global warming and global dissent
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
The climate-change bill has, under the hands of various Congress members, become a weak cousin of what it could have been, the editorial board complains. Sections have been reshaped to benefit the farm industry, while other important sections have simply been gutted. Still, it represents the first real effort by the United States to grapple with global warming, and should pass, as the board concludes:
The House should pass the Waxman-Markey bill, and the Senate should speedily follow suit. Even congressional Republicans can’t generate as much hot air as the billions of metric tons of carbon dioxide it would eliminate.
The board also bemoans a court ruling that badly weakens the powers of the Los Angeles controller’s office. Under Laura Chick, the office produced important watchdog reports on the operations of city government; now it is in danger of becoming weaker than it was even in the days before Chick. The board calls on the City Council to restore these powers legislatively but doubts, considering that council members also could find themselves the butt of the controller’s investigations, that it will.
On the other side of the page, thoughts on Iran dominate the page. Renowned former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky advises the West to listen more closely to the dissenters in oppressive regimes such as Iran. They might lack money, power and sophistication, Sharansky writes, but they know more about the evolution of the national mindset.
People in free societies watching massive military parades or vociferous displays of love for the leaders of totalitarian regimes often conclude, ‘Well, that’s their mentality; there’s nothing we can do about it.’ Thus they and their leaders miss what is readily grasped by local dissidents attuned to what is happening on the ground: the spectacle of a nation of double-thinkers slowly or rapidly approaching a condition of open dissent.
And John R. Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, criticizes President Obama for soft-pedaling his response to Iran. The president will never succeed in persuading Iran to forgo its nuclear initiative, Bolton argues, so there’s no point in playing nice.