Just how unpopular is Boulder’s climate lawsuit?
Less than a week after leading Democrats running for governor in Colorado refused to endorse the climate lawsuit, the Denver Post reports that Colorado’s largest green group also refuses to endorse the suit.
As the Denver Post reported Monday:
“The four Democratic candidates for governor support neither the climate lawsuit nor Initiative 97, which increases drilling operations’ minimum distance from occupied buildings from the current 500 feet to 2,500 feet. The state’s leading environmental group, Conservation Colorado, also is not endorsing either effort, but its leaders downplay the lack of unity on the issues.” (emphasis added)
As EID has consistently pointed out over the years, Conservation Colorado has deep financial ties to California billionaire Tom Steyer. And while even Steyer say he “loves” the Boulder lawsuit, he says he won’t put any of this own money to support it.
The real crux of the story is that the anti-fossil fuel agenda the California billionaire has been trying to push in Colorado has run into overwhelming bipartisan resistance. Whether it’s a climate lawsuit or anti-energy ballot measures, it appears Steyer has finally learned that his extreme anti-fossil fuel message simply won’t sell in the state.
That doesn’t mean, however, that he won’t be pouring money into the states to back candidates he believes will carry out his agenda.
Colorado Manufacturers Pushback Against Lawsuit
News of the Democratic and environmental opposition comes as Colorado’s manufacturers came together last week to showcase why the Boulder climate lawsuit simply doesn’t make sense.
At a panel hosted by the Colorado Association of Commerce & Industry (CACI) and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) last Thursday, State Representative Cole Wist, Assistant House Minority Leader, and attorney Bret Sumner laid out key concerns with the suit.
As Chuck Berry, President of CACI, explained to the audience:
“We believe that if left unchecked, special interests groups could broaden their targets beyond the energy industry into other sectors beyond what is attacked in this lawsuit,”
Wist, in an interview with CBS-Denver, noted lawsuits like Boulder’s are simply a public relations opportunity:
“’I’m not sure how to quantify these types of claims in a traditional way and award monetary damages,’ said Representative Cole Wist, a [R]epublican from Centennial. ’Is the objective of the lawsuit to accomplish a political message or to send political message, or is the objective here to really effectuate some change, and I’m not sure what that change is. I’ve read the 109-page complaint and I don’t get it.’”
Sumner, an oil and gas attorney for Beatty & Wozniak, opposed the “weaponization” of science.
“Until we quit trying weaponize science to create a bigger issue and actually look at this in a very rational manner, it is going to be hard to have that type of productive policy dialogue,” Sumner said.
“If you have 100 different courts give 50 different opinions, legal standards on how you address climate change it is going to create a lot of legal uncertainty,” Sumner added.
As laid out best in our digital short launched last week, the case against the Boulder climate lawsuit is strong. For one thing, their lawsuit is filled with “wild leaps of logic divorced from reality,” its claims ranging from the “dubious” to the “bizarre.” At one point it even “asserts something that appears to violate a basic law of physics.” It now faces even more resistance, this time from one of the biggest green groups in the state.