A (Mostly) Warm Reception for Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth’ on the Hill

Gore tells Senate committee to put aside politics on climate change; warming critic Inhofe gets hot under the collar.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


It was a Democratic love fest on Capitol Hill yesterday when Al Gore came to testify about the “planetary emergency” caused by global warming before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, a bittersweet counterpoint to the ex-VP’s last appearance on the Hill, back in 2001 when he presided over the Congressional session confirming George Bush’s electoral victory. What a difference six years, and a pair of Academy Awards, makes: Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, in her opening statement, set the tone, gushing, “There are some moments in human history when individuals have the ability to make a difference and sometimes it’s the simple telling of a great truth, however inconvenient.”

When the Democrats took control of Congress in November of last year, environmentalists were ecstatic that a California conservationist would replace Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who has called global warming “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,” as chair of the environmental committee. And none, perhaps, more than Gore, who told the senators that “it is hard to estimate the hope that people have because of what you are doing and what everyone hopes you will do.” Gore didn’t hold back in the rest of his testimony either, likening the United States’ approach to the planet to a “bull in a china shop,” and rattling off his recommended fixes, which include, among other things, an immediate freeze on carbon dioxide emissions.

Following Gore’s testimony came the part that everyone was waiting for, when he was questioned by his most persistent critic. Inhofe, author of “A Skeptic’s Guide to Debunking Global Warming Alarmism,” did not disappoint, peppering Gore with a round of rapid-fire and often hostile questions. Concerned that Gore would run out the clock with his “long-winded” responses, Inhofe demanded that he restrict his answers to either yes or no. When Gore attempted to diverge from the rules, Inhofe promptly cut him off. Boxer intervened, saying that she would be happy to stop the clock to allow Gore more time. Inhofe tried to protest, his face growing red, but Boxer coolly reminded him that he no longer made the rules: “You used to, when you did this. I make the rules [now].”

During the lightning round, Inhofe asked Gore — who last month had to admit to a home energy consumption of 20 times the average household’s — to make a personal pledge to consume no more energy than the average American household. Gore attempted to explain that he and his wife are using green energy and purchasing offsets to install solar panels, but Inhofe wasn’t interested. “I’ll take that as a no.” Not more than 20 minutes later, Inhofe’s staffers scurried around the press tables handing out a “press update” noting that Gore had refused to sign the pledge.

Amidst pointed questioning from the minority and effusive accolades from the Dems – “It’s not everyday that this committee has an Academy Award winner testifying,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D.-Minn.) — committee members plugged their various global warming fixes. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) talked up the cap and trade bill that he is cosponsoring with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) pitched the legislation that he is co-sponsoring with Boxer, which would “lower greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2020 to 1990 levels,” by calling for a mandatory cap on greenhouse gases, and creating incentives for the development of cleaner technologies.

Although the partisan divide on this issue was quite evident, Gore implored the committee members to put politics aside. “This is not a partisan issue, it’s a moral issue,” he said. If nothing is done to combat global warming, he continued, his voice rising, the next generation will look back and ask, “What in God’s name were they doing?”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate