Government claims about climate change seem to be closely linked to government claims about “campaign finance.”
Every claim of campaign finance reformers is untrue. Election outcomes are barely correlated with campaign ad spending; and to the extent there is any correlation, it is likely that political success (or perceived likely success) CAUSES the spending rather than the other way around.
In each of the past 5 national election cycles, the “side” (if you regard Democrats and Republicans as different sides) which spent the most money LOST.
And then there are claims that “corporate” involvement in politics skews election outcomes in favor of the rich. In fact, corporations are a business model for the little guy; if corporations were abolished, the super rich would have a far greater monopoly on speech and press.
Another prevailing theme among campaign finance reformers is that “millionaires and billionaires” in the private sector are defeating sound policymaking in the area of “climate change policy” by thwarting the will of the masses.
The reality is almost precisely opposite.
Recent polling shows that just 2 percent of voters say that “climate change” or other environmental concerns are the issues that drive their votes.
Climate change is quintessentially an issue only for wealthy government-entrenched elites.
