Fuelling controversy

The US President’s annual State of the Union speech is a favorite place to unveil new initiatives. For the past several months there has been a buzz that President George W. Bush would say something dramatic about climate change. “Buzz” in Washington can mean political trial balloons, genuine leaks or simply wishful thinking. It took a while to sort out the truth in this case. The week before the speech, a columnist for the Washington Post thought he might have smoked out the secret. Carbon emissions trading, which the White House had long resisted, could be the January surprise. “A fantasy, you say? On Saturday I put the case for a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system to James Connaughton, the head of the Council on Environmental Quality at the White House. Far from denouncing these policies as ecosocialist nonsense, Connaughton sounded open to them. ‘In concept I can agree with you,’ he said.” But the Post soon reported that White House spokesman Tony Snow “slapped that down” at the next regular press briefing. The Boston Globe tried another bold prediction the day before the speech, noting that, “many in Congress and the energy industry expect it to include raising fuel-economy standards for automobiles, more support for renewable energy sources, and efforts to control emissions at utility plants and other big polluters.” That turned out to be somewhat closer to the truth. When Mr. Bush finally took the podium in front of Congress, he did call for improved fuel-efficiency standards for cars and more reliance on alternative fuels. However, power plants and industry, which generate Mediawatch: Richard F. Harris looks at the response to climate change issues raised in President Bush’s State of the Union address last month. Fuelling controversy