Washblog

Here is the classic Reichert line on his role as investigator -- in this case it's about global warming:

As an investigator, I am pursuing all of the information available on global warming and its potential causes. My mind is open and my office is open. I will continue to meet with groups concerned about this issue and gather evidence.

He issued this "clarification" on his views about global warming as a justification for taking the same position as George Bush.  However, the public record demonstrates that Reichert is not out gathering evidence.  In fact, by missing his own Committee hearings, he appears to be ignoring evidence that would otherwise just be dropped in his lap.

On June 8, 2005, the House Science Committee held a hearing on global warming.  The purpose of the hearing was to talk to industry leaders about why they were taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Reichert is a member of  the Committee.

In advance of the hearing, the Science Committee described who the witnesses would be and what some of the key questions were going to be:

Questions to the witnesses.

The witnesses were asked to respond in their testimony to the following questions:

Mr. James Rogers, Cinergy

• What concrete actions is Cinergy taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?  In what ways are they beneficial to Cinergy?  
  
• Why is Cinergy taking these actions and what are the most important drivers for them?  

Dr. Mack McFarland, Dupont

• What concrete actions is DuPont taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?  In what ways are they beneficial to DuPont?  
  
• Why is DuPont taking these actions and what are the most important drivers for them?  

Mr. Ronald Meissen, Baxter International

• What concrete actions is Baxter Healthcare taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?  In what ways are they beneficial to Baxter?  
  
• Why is Baxter taking these actions and what are the most important drivers for them?  

Dr. Robert Hobbs, United Technologies Corporation

• What concrete actions is UTC taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?  In what ways are they beneficial to UTC?  
  
• Why is UTC taking these actions and what are the most important drivers for them?  

Now, if Reichert was truly interested in gathering "all of the information available on global warming and its potential causes," you'd think he'd make sure to attend this hearing.

At the hearing, he would have learned that the National Academy of Sciences has found that

Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise.

Reichert would have heard a representative of the huge coal burning utility Cinergy testify:

Over the past several years I have developed a better understanding of climate change and I see the debate in the scientific world honing in on a few basic facts:  that the world is warming and that human activities have contributed to the warming.

He would have heard a representative of the global healthcare company Baxter International state:

I gave my first speech on global warming in 1989, to a group of my colleagues attending the company's annual Environmental Conference. Even then, prior to the more definitive scientific studies that have emerged over the last decade, some environmental professionals and enlightened organizations concluded that their emissions were having an impact on the atmosphere and environment, and began pursuing initiatives to reduce energy use, reduce emissions and eliminate the use of compounds and gases believed to contribute to the greenhouse effect.

Reichert would have been directed to the UTC website which states

WHAT WE ARE DOING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE

We believe that climate change is the most critical environmental concern facing the world. How society tackles the challenge will determine the quality of life for future generations.

Climate change is caused by the increased concentration of certain gases in the atmosphere. These act as a blanket and prevent excess heat from escaping into space. Scientific opinion is that humanmade greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels) are contributing to the increased concentrations.

But, you know what?  Reichert didn't hear this testimony, because he didn't bother to go to the hearing.  He didn't gather facts, he didn't ask questions.  Since when does an investigator not cross-examine witnesses?  If he thought there were real questions about the science of global warming, why didn't he raise them at this hearing?

Now keep in mind that there are very few things a Member of Congress is expected to do.  Vote on the House floor.  Attend Committee hearings and markups.  Help constituents.  Sure, they get paid well for performing these duties, but it is supposed to be about more than receiving a nice salary.  When they run for office, they are agreeing to represent their district and find policy solutions to the problems facing the nation.

Dave Reichert is not pounding the pavement searching for truth.  Heck, he doesn't even think he has to attend hearings of the Committees he sits on.  He is ignoring his duty and the truth and throwing up a smokescreen in hopes that the voters of WA-8 will never notice.

Fortunately, there is a better option: Darcy Burner.