To the editor: Law professor Jonathan H. Adler wants to believe President Trump’s claim that environmental protection is a “top priority” of his administration. The president’s actions since that statement belie his words.
Adler proclaims that “regulatory mandates are a poor fit for climate change.” I would ask Adler where we would be now if not for regulatory mandates on lower emissions for cars. Rather, he wishes to pursue an unregulated, free-enterprise solution to our climate problems.
There’s no guarantee that free enterprise will produce what is needed. Rather, the U.S. and the world need a joint solution where free enterprise combined with government directives (based on sound science) work together to make our world a livable place.
Mark Chipman, San Diego
To the editor: Republicans in Congress don’t care about conservative principles.
Given the opportunity to choose a conservative pathway to limit climate change, not even a handful of GOP members in Congress support one. A revenue-neutral, small-government approach — namely, a price on carbon that would leave even the recent obscene tax cuts untouched — is currently available in several bills. Conservative members have been lobbied by supporters of this approach for years.
They know about the bill H.R. 763, which rings all the conservative bells. They understand that it requires no budgetary outlays (instead, polluters pay) and millions of new “green” careers would be created.
Jan Freed, Los Angeles
To the editor: There can be differing views on addressing climate change, and Trump can certainly be criticized for pulling out of the Paris agreement.
However, the letter writer who stated, “There can be no one more reckless than this alive today,” clearly demonstrates the hatred of Trump that defies rational thought.
With comments like this, is it any wonder that Trump continues to have such strong support from his base of voters?
Janet Polak, Beverly Hills