Ban AC for DC

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Link here. As Glenn Reynolds notes

I’m inspired by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Tex., who noticed something peculiar recently. It seems that EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, who spends a lot of time telling Americans that they need to drive less, fly less, and in general reduce their consumption of fossil fuels, also flies home to see her family in Boston “almost every weekend”; the head of the Clean Air Division, Janet McCabe, does the same, but she heads to Indianapolis. In air mileage alone, the Daily Caller News Foundation estimates that McCarthy surpasses the carbon footprint of an ordinary American. Smith has introduced a bill that wouldn’t target the EPA honchos’ personal travel, though: It provides, simply, that “None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to pay the cost of any officer or employee of the Environmental Protection Agency for official travel by airplane.”

This makes sense to me. We’re constantly told by the administration that “climate change” is a bigger threat than terrorism. And as even President Obama has noted, there’s a great power in setting an example: “We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK.”

Likewise, it’s hard to expect Americans to accept changes to their own lifestyles when the very people who are telling them that it’s a crisis aren’t acting like it’s a crisis. So I have a few suggestions to help bring home the importance of reduced carbon footprints at home and abroad:

Reynolds than goes on to suggest further restrictions on the fossil fuel use of the hoi poloi in Washington, including heavy taxes on fuel used by private jets, heavy taxes on coastal regions like liberal cities like New York, Boston, and Washington to prepare for sea rise, and the banning air-conditioning in the District of Columbia.

Obama makes a great point about setting the thermostat at 72 degrees. We should ban air conditioning in federal buildings. We won two world wars without air conditioning our federal employees. Nothing in their performance over the last 50 or 60 years suggests that A/C has improved things. Besides, The Washington Post informs us that A/C is sexist, and that Europeans think it’s stupid.

Makes sense to me!



  • wayne

    Beautiful Post!

    It should also be noted– the Federal District of Columbia, was situated in a swamp, for a reason

  • PeterF

    Obviously Rep Lamar Smith R-Tex. fails to understand that environmental protection is the most important issue facing humanity today. The United States Environmental Protection Agency leads the world in efforts to protect humanity from its wasteful polluting right wing habits. Therefore, the administrators of the U.S. EPA are arguably the most important people in the world. The saintly and caring leaders of such an important function fully endorsed by our beneficent dear leader must be, and are by definition “family oriented”. Would you be so crass as to suggest that they forego the rejuvenating effects of family visits? Or perhaps they should stay tied to their offices, and their families should be brought to them? How much more of a carbon footprint would be incurred to fly their entire families to Washington every week? And who would pay for housing them? Not the taxpayers I hope. Would you be willing to put your money where your mouth is?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *