Al Gore, Corporate Welfare Environmentalist

The classic capitalist dodge of a robust environmentalism has typically been "we can't afford it!" All the while corporations receive billions in welfare from the corporate nanny state. They insist that environmental protection has to be subjected to market disciplines, while simultaneously relying on the nanny state to socialize their costs. "Profits for me, costs for you" is the cri de coeur of late Western capitalistism.

As if you needed more reasons to not support Al Gore, it's precisely this kind of corporate-welfare-rich environmentalism that he'd pursue if given a chance.

From Rob Weissman's latest:

Gas prices are rising and the threat of global warming looms ever larger. Al Gore, what have you done to wean the United States from its oil dependency?

Asked a related question in a recent debate with Bill Bradley ("We sent our armed forces to the Persian Gulf in 1991 to return a country to its owners. Now we see higher gas prices. What will you do to ensure this does not happen again?"), Gore responded:

"We have an interest in being less dependent on sources of oil from a region that is, over time, vulnerable to instability. I helped to put in place a program called the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, which commits the big three automakers in our country to getting new vehicles into the marketplace that have three times the efficiency of today's vehicles."

It was telling that Al "Earth in the Balance" Gore would point to the relatively obscure Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV), the epitome of what might be called corporate welfare environmentalism.

The Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) is a public-private partnership between seven federal agencies, 20 federal laboratories, and the big three automakers -- General Motors, Ford and what is now Daimler Chrysler.

PNGV's main long term goal is to develop a "Supercar," "an environmentally friendly car with up to triple the fuel efficiency of today's midsize cars -- without sacrificing affordability, performance or safety."

It is hard to imagine an industry less in need of government support for research than the highly capitalized auto industry. Ford pulled in profits of $5.4 billion in the first three quarters of 1999. GM earned $4.8 billion over the same period. The government is supporting research that the industry could easily do on its own (and, to some extent, is doing apart from the PNGC initiative), and should be mandated to undertake to meet tougher environmental standards.

How is it that the competitors in the oligopolistic auto industry are able to undertake a joint research undertaking? The PNGV program gives participants an effective exemption from antitrust laws.

... Above all, the PNGV initiative has served during the Clinton-Gore administration as a smokescreen behind which the automakers hide to protect themselves from more stringent air quality standards.

"Cynics think that the PNGV was simply a politically astute 10-year reprieve for the domestic auto industry from threats of higher Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency standards," writes Earth Day founder Denis Hayes in his new book, The Official Earth Day Guide to Planet Repair.

Deployment of existing technologies could dramatically enhance auto fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but the automakers -- who have waged a decades-long crusade against mandatory fuel efficiency standards -- choose not to make these technologies widely available.

If you're not an environmentalist, you should be. If you are, the only sane choice in November is Ralph Nader. He's the only candidate who's shown the slightest interest in weaning corporations off the nanny state, which is the only way we'll get real, that is, robust and effective, environmental policy in America.