AEP’s Morris on Blankenship and climate change
AEP President Michael Morris talks to reporters at Friday’s kickoff of the CCS project at his company’s Mountaineer Plant in Mason County. Gazette photo by Lawrence Pierce.
Massey Energy President Don Blankenship has had some pretty harsh words for other corporate executives who have taken a more progressive position on climate change.
In one recent op-ed piece, Blankenship wrote:
Speaking plainly and clearly is a rarity in politics and business — particularly among CEOs of publicly traded companies. Many times I’ve sat in meetings with executives who admit privately they doubt the certainty of the science behind global warming claims. And they acknowledge that global warming legislation will have a devastating effect on their companies in the form of lost jobs and lower output.
On Friday, in an interview prior to the big kick-off ceremony of American Electric Power’s CCS project at the Mountaineer Plant in Mason County, I asked Morris (above) what he thought of Blankenship’s statements. After all, Morris is one of those corporate CEOs who isn’t arguing there’s no such thing as global warming … I wondered what he would say.
Well, Morris noted that Blankenship’s company is one of AEP’s major coal suppliers, and tactfully added, “Don, as you know, is a very strong member of the West Virginia scene.”
But what about Blankenship’s insistence that global warming is a hoax? Morris disagreed:
I think there’s enough consensus that it’s worth doing something if we can so something, and it’s worth seeing if this technology will work.
And what about Blankenship’s criticism of corporate executives who don’t just fight any legislative effort to mandate greenhouse gas emission? Morris said:
I don’t think he appreciates that the EPA is moving a proposal to do that under the Clean Air Act, and legislation is much preferable to EPA regulation.
That’s similar to the position that United Mine Workers President Cecil Roberts has taken … that is, that it’s better to try to work with lawmakers and get an acceptable bill than take your chances on what the Obama administration might do on its own through EPA.
But Blankenship isn’t the only one in the coal industry who doesn’t buy that argument. Last week, for example, Mike Carey of the Ohio Coal Association told a Senate committee:
The American public will not be fooled with Congress blaming EPA and EPA blaming the Supreme Court. If those members of Congress who are concerned with what EPA might do, then they need only pass a simple one sentence amendment to the Clean Air Act prohibiting such actions and codifying the intent of the authors of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments that the legislation does not, in fact, cover carbon dioxide.
Of course, the House-passed climate bill stripped EPA of its ability to take action via regulation. But the Senate bill retained the EPA regulatory authority.
Today in Washington, Republican members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee are boycotting an effort by Democratic leaders to move the Senate bill.
Meanwhile, back in West Virginia, Gazette readers continue to do a pretty decent job of debunking Blankenship’s letters to the editor claiming there’s nothing to worry about with climate change.
In response to Blankenship’s “global warming is a myth” letter from a few weeks ago, reader Ed Saugstad of Sinks Grove wrote in today’s Gazette:
The global temperature has not been declining during the past nine years. According to the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, at least seven out of the 10 warmest years on record have occurred in the 2000s.
University of Colorado data clearly show a steady rise in sea level (sealevel.colorado.edu).
Year to year fluctuations in hurricane activity certainly have occurred in the number of storms, but the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has doubled in the last 30 years, associated with increasing sea temperatures (University of Florida report).
The Earth is warming, and the climate changing, but as human activity is at least partially responsible, we can take steps to mitigate the effects. Mr. Blankenship should see this as an opportunity, not an obstacle.
In Sunday’s paper, Blankenship’s buddy Carol Hubbard (co-founder of the front group And For the Sake of the Kids, which Blankenship used to defeat Supreme Court Justice Larry Starcher and put Brent Benjamin on the Supreme Court) was listed as the author of an op-ed piece in the Gazette-Mail. Hubbard’s piece included this paragraph:
Are we, as proud West Virginians, going to stand idly by while a bunch of limp-wristed greenieacs - who, by the way, for the most part don’t even live here - try to shut down our state’s biggest industry? If we let these people go unchecked, it won’t be long until everything we love is gone: hunting, fishing, racing, working, everything.
Over at West Virginia Blue, Heath Harrison commented:
Is this really what Blankenship and his allies have come to?
Reducing the discussion to pre-adolescent gay-baiting?
Harrison also took the Gazette’s editors to task for publishing this … read that commentary here.
16 comments
Good for Heath Harrison for “calling out” the Gazette on this issue. Thanks, Heath!
One thing Charleston,West Virginia can be very proud of is that gay West Virginians can live here in dignity and pride. For our city’s leading newspaper to print such despicable attacks is inconsistent with everything good this city and its people stand for.
It would be good for the Gazette to very promptly acknowledge that printing these slurs was wrong — no doubt an innocent mistake, but still a mistake.
I respectfully disagree, Tom. I think Hubbard and others of his ilk repel most thinking people with this kind of bigoted name calling. So let him go ahead and turn people against him. Let him go ahead and reveal what a bigot he is. Better that we all know.
Vickie — did you read Heath Harrison’s comments that Ken linked to? If you did not, I’d be interested in hearing what you feel after reading them.
What you say has some force, but I think Heath has the best take — if you let this kind of bigotry come in, then how do you exclude race-baiting, etc? Or, maybe that’s OK, too, if it shows how puerile the writer is?
I guess it’s a judgment call. I’m sure you agree that it would be wrong to have a double standard in this regard — that discriminates against gay people.
Tom, Vickie, all:
Let me make sure everyone reading Coal Tattoo is clear on one thing … I don’t make the decisions about which op-ed pieces run in the Gazette or how they are edited in regards to these sorts of comments.
I’m happy to have folks have a discussion about this on Coal Tattoo … but just wanted to be clear about that. Folks who want to complain to the Gazette can contact the editor, Jim Haught, at haught@wvgazette.com
Ken.
Ken — Can you clarify if the Gazette has a policy regarding fact checking of the op-ed pieces it publishes?
There’s also at least one definitely wrong fact in the op-ed and I count two more items presented as fact (not opinion) that I would have a very difficult time sourcing.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion–no matter how ugly or bigoted–but if we can’t agree on some basic facts, it’s going to be hard to find any common ground moving forward.
In addition, note that Mr. Hubbard cited a figure about coal severance taxes:
“Coal severance taxes make up 60 percent of our state’s budget. ”
I’d be interested to know where that number comes from …
Pages 14 and 93 of this state budget report,
http://www.wvbudget.gov/BudDocs/WVBudget_FY2010_Vol%201_Report.pdf
Put that number at more like 8.6 percent, and that’s for ALL severance taxes, not just coal.
Ken.
Clem,
Not to put you off … but any explanation of the policies concerning the editorial page and op-eds would have to come from Jim Haught, the editor, or Dawn Miller, the editorial page editor.
Ken.
I have mixed feelings about the Gazette printing Hubbard’s piece in the paper. It was an ugly read to be sure and those of us who are repelled by such ugly, repugnant statements should be upset by it, however, allowing it to be printed allows all of us to see the utter depths that some people will drop too to get attention. It is very sad that in WV some employers such as Hubbard have such hateful leanings, and it makes me wonder what kind of pressure he may put on his employees.
Hubbard’s comments weren’t childish, they were absolutely hateful and dangerous. Middle School kids are usually punished for saying the things that Hubbard did, what is bad is this is supposedly an influential adult spewing hate. We all need to know who these people are and expose them for what they are. I believe in a way that is exactly what the Gazette did in allowing Hubbard’s views to be printed.
I did read it, Tom, it’s very well written, and it’s a perfectly valid point of view.
But if someone sent a SEXIST op-ed to the Gazette, would I, as a female, want the Gazette to edit out the sexist part? I suppose the nature of the particular comment would be a factor, but generally speaking, I think the answer is no: if someone wants to broadcast from the rooftops that s/he is a neanderthal, I think it’s better to let him/her go ahead, so we all know what kind of person we’re dealing with. If there was a palpable danger that the bigot might persuade OTHERS to his/her point of view, that would be one thing. But I think we’re sufficiently advanced that a comment like “limp-wristed greeniac” is going to persuade no one to think like Hubbard does. Rather, it just shows the world what kind of guy he is, and I think that’s for the better.
So the Republicans don’t want to play. I guess they’ll take their pseudo science back to their rooms and spend the time calling fund raisers. Another day, another taxpayer dollar.
Censorship is a slippery slope, I wholly agree.
But, apropos of a “double standard”: I doubt that the Gazette would have printed an op-ed that referred to “primitive, darky” dictators in Africa; “oily, grasping, big-nosed” financiers on Wall Street; or “castrating, weaker-sex” pay equality advocates.
My guess is that the wonderful Gazette editors simply missed the “limp-wristed” slur. I hope they issue a correction. Per Ken’s reference, I sent Jim Haught a message asking him to check out these comments.
On second and third thought, maybe seeking some sort of “correction” is a cheap shot - so I withdraw the suggestion.
Heath, maybe you better write a letter to the editor calling Mr. Hubbard’s views those of a “honky retard” — and see if it’s printed — and whether those slurs then arouse the ire of white people, and the parents of kids with developmental disabilities!
Certainly the worst in people can come out when they are threatened and the WV coal miner, and all of the support jobs it creates, are indeed threatened by the actions of the current administration in D.C. There will certainly be more emotion-packed actions to come if mining permits are farther delayed, denied and revoked. It is possible that if a newspaper had a bias toward coal, then it might unwittingly publish remarks and actions that made the pro-coal side look bad and suppress a lot of unflattering content of anti-coal supporters. My guess is Mr. Hubbard resents making the remark and T. Rodd should also for his comments.
Casey, if you or anyone else thought I was calling Mr. Hubbard a bad name, then I was not clear, and I do apologize.
I was just pointing out the kind of slur he used, and why the newspaper would never print that - but they let his slur, based on effeminacy, go by.
I think it would be absolutely great if Mr. Hubbard would say he regrets calling those greeniacs “limp-wristed.” It might make life easier at the next Hubbard family reunion, when gay cousin Arthur takes him to task for his choice of words!
Rodd, you used not one but four offensive slurs to make your point and the last one seemed to represent your feelings toward Mr. Hubbard. I just feel it was over-the-top, tricky and out of line.
Casey,
I think you’re missing Tom’s point … I don’t speak for him — but I think he was using examples to illustrate what he thought the Gazette would not allow — IF someone wrote a letter calling Mr. Hubbard a “honky retard” Tom thinks it unlikely the newspaper would print it.
But frankly, I think we’ve had enough back and forth on this one … if folks are upset about the Gazette publishing Mr. Hubbard’s remarks, please do contact the editors and let them know that.
Ken.