THE BLOG

Up or down?

03/03/2007 12:30 pm ET | Updated May 25, 2011

Here's a question for you.

You know global warming is a serious problem that will have substantial and growing impacts on our economy, health, and well-being. You know global warming is driven by human greenhouse-gas emissions.

Over the coming decade, do you want emissions to continue rising, or to start falling? Up or down?

Under Bush's largely voluntary climate policies, they're going to go up -- about as fast in the coming decade as in the previous one. That's the headline finding of the long-delayed U.S. Climate Action Report, a periodic update on climate trends and actions (required of all signatories to the UN 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change).

The report will be released soon, but was leaked in advance to Andy Revkin at The New York Times, where it yielded this bombshell piece of reporting. This info-graphic ought to appear on the front page of every newspaper in the country.

CEI's Myron Ebell -- Wormtongue to Bush's Saruman -- would have you believe that the projected growth in emissions is a good thing. Why? Because emissions are growing more slowly than the economy overall. We're decreasing our greenhouse gas "intensity."

Raise your hand if you're comforted by this.

The fact is, under Bush's policies, emissions go up. Under the Sanders-Boxer bill in the Senate, or the Waxman-Pelosi bill in the House, emissions go down.

Here's a simple, clear message to take to voters in 2008: "Under business-as-usual, climate-polluting emissions go up. Under our leadership, they'll go down."

Which does America want? Up or down? Let voters choose.