Mike Rosen Show, Mike Coffman, August 21, 2013

Station:     KOA, 850 AM

Show:        Mike Rosen Show

Guests:     Coffman

Link:               http://www.850koa.com/pages/mikerosen.html

Date:         August 21, 2013

Topics:      Climate Change Political Advertisement, “Ostrich”, Attack Ads, November 2014, Special Interest, Outside Money, Climate Scientists, Anthropogenic Origins, Man-made and Human Activity Causes, Global Warming, People for the American Way, Ralph Nader CoPIRG, Colorado Public Interest Research Groups, Gene Karpinski, David Brower, League of Conservation Volters (LCV),  Andrew Romanoff, Ronald Reagan, Carbon Tax, Public Citizen, Keystone Pipeline, Solyndra, Congress Watch, NASA, James Hanse, Duran and Zimmerman Study,

Click Here for Audio


HOST MIKE ROSEN:  [League of Conservation Voters] They’re running some attack ads on Mike Coffman, well in advance of the November 2014 election.  And I got an email from a couple people saying, “Why don’t you get Mike Coffman on the air and why isn’t he spending some money defending himself?”  Mike is on the show frequently, and he and I are friends, so I thought it would be a good opportunity to have him on.  And we’ve got him with us right now.  Hello, Mike!

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE MIKE COFFMAN:  Hey, Mike!  How are you doing?

ROSEN:  I’m doing fine.  Why don’t we let the listeners hear that ad that’s running and then have you comment on it.  Here we go.

COFFMAN:  Sure.  Okay, absolutely.

[Television ad plays for listeners.  “This is the African Ostrich…”]

ROSEN:  All right. [laughs] We’ll get to a deconstruction of this, and that phony statistic about 97% of climate scientists.  I’ve  got specifics on that.  That one is a gross misrepresentation.  It has to do with a tiny sample size.  And spun way the question is presented.  As I said, David Brower started this outfit, Gene Karpinski is now the head of it.  Gene Karpinski worked as Field Director for People for the American Way.  That’s the ultra-leftwing  Norman Lear group that was started, oh, I don’t know, back in the  80s or so, to attack Ronald Reagan, or maybe even  earlier than that.  In any event, so, that’s where they sit.  That’s where they’re coming from.  What’s your reaction to this and how come you aren’t doing anything to defend yourself.

COFFMAN:  Well, guys, it’s so early, but here is what is so unprecedented about this.  This is the largest infusion of outside special interest cash in a Colorado Congressional race in the history of our state.  I mean, this buy that they’ve done, is about – it’s 790 –it’s about $800,000 buy, which is just extraordinary.  Um, and obviously done in behalf of my opponent, liberal Denver Democrat Andrew Romanoff.  But, uh –.

ROSEN:  Yeah.  Let me stop – let me stop right there, too.  This is a 527 group.

COFFMAN:  Mm-hmm

ROSEN:  And they’re allowed to run political ads, but they can’t go so far as to say, “Vote for Andrew Romanoff.”  So, they have to have this phony little tag, “Tell Mike Coffman what you think.”  [laughs] That’s obviously not their intent.  And by the way, their mission statement clearly says that they want to elect – how do  they – let me get their exact wording,  [reading the mission statement] “To advocate for sound environmental policies, and to elect pro-environmental candidates who will adopt and implement such policies.” And virtually exclusively, those candidates that they endorse are Democrats.  And this is a swing seat.  It’s a key seat.  It’s one that has been gerrymandered to make it more winnable for a Democrat.  You’ve been in that seat when it was a safe seat for a Republican.  So, out of state money from environmental groups and any other group that just wants a Republican majority in the U.S. House is going to just pour in here to help Romanoff win.

COFFMAN: [correcting Rosen]  Or wants a Democrat majority.  And I mean, so, this group, —

ROSEN:  I mean a Democrat majority, thank you.  Yeah.

COFFMAN:  — clearly, they want things like a carbon tax.  They don’t want the XL Pipeli—the Keystone Pipeline built, you know.  They want investments in things like Solyndra.  Just absolutely stunning.  So, obviously they think that if they get rid of me, they’ll have a loyal soldier on the far left.  And that’s probably true.  That is true.  But — and it’s stunning.  And, of course, the way – if you go to the website, that they put – they won’t say “tax”, they don’t say “carbon tax”.  They say legislation to put – to put a price on carbon.  [laughing] That’s a tax!

ROSEN:  Now, what they want to do is create an early impression.  And if you’re not funded at this point campaign-wise, so far in advance of the election to counter, that early impression can become indelible.  That’s their strategy.

COFFMAN:  Well, it is stunning to do – I mean, I think obviously they’re trying to see if they can move some numbers, and get some other outside groups to come in to Colorado on their heels.  But it is a—I mean, it is a stunning amount — I mean, $800,000 ad buy, well over a year out of the election, is just unprecedented.  But it tells you how much outside groups are going to play in this race, particularly on the Left.

ROSEN:  All right.  When we come back, let’s deal with the assertion that 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.  I don’t know if you have all the info on that statistic and how misleading it is, but I’ve got it.   We can talk about that after these words on 850 KOA.

[commercial break]

ROSEN:  Congressman Mike Coffan on the line with us.  We’re talking about this attack ad being run way in advance of the election, funded with the money from an out-of-state operation called the League of Conservation Voters, and whoever else contributes to that group.  The current president is Gene Karpinsky, with Ralph Nader credentials.  He was Executive Director of the Colorado Public Interest Research Group – those PIRG groups are Nader groups.  He also did a stint with People for the American Way, and he joined CongressWatch which is another Nader operation.  It’s a division of Public Citizen.  So, you know where he sits.  And in this ad, they’re making the claim that 97% of experts say that human activity is causing climate change.  I’ve got some specifics on the source of that.  Mike, are you fluent in that?  Or, would you like me to –.

COFFMAN:  Well, sure.  I mean, my – I mean, my view is that it’s naturally occurring, number one.  But certainly man-made activity influences that at the margins and I think it’s debatable how much that is.  But certainly, you know, we know that carbon emissions are bad, and we ought to do everything responsible to bring them down, in a balanced approach between environmental concerns and economic concerns.

ROSEN:  Well, specifically, the claim that 97% of climate scientists agree on this is simply preposterous.  There are various places where this statistic comes from.  One place is a study done by Duran and Zimmerman.  [laughs]  And they had a sample size of 79 climatologists.  Seventy-nine!  Way too small a sample size.  And that group was self-selected, not randomly picked.  The two questions they asked where this one, number one, “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?”  Well, there’s no debate about that.  Even people who are skeptics about the degree of human influence, all agree that since the mini-Ice Age, temperatures have fallen, all over the globe.  So, to attach 97% or 100% to that question, is meaningless.  But here’s the key question:  “Do you think that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?”  The word ‘significant’ isn’t defined here.  And again, their sample size was 76 out of 79 self-selected participants.  Another way of phrasing that question more accurately, if one is interested in accuracy, would be to say, “Do you believe that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions — that is, those emissions caused by human activity – were the primary factor – 50% or more– in the observed mean global temperature increase since the mid-20th century?”  They didn’t ask that  question.  And had they asked that question, they would have gotten a number far below 97%, which is why they didn’t ask that question.

COFFMAN:  Yeah, you know, I think it’s amazing.  And one thing I’ve certainly read, and from viabile sources is that a lot of the research that’s being done, if you don’t – when you put your application in to get a grant, if you don’t submit to, you know, to the orthodoxy of climate change by the radical invironmentalists you’re not going to get a grant.

ROSEN:  Yeah, and then when they cite NASA, they’re referring to James Hansen, who’s a radical environmentalist and one of the leaders of the alarmist movement on man-caused global warming.  This is mostly James Hansen at NASA making these comments.

COFFMAN:  Mm-hmm.

ROSEN:  But in any event, they’re going to beat you over the head with this 97% figure, misleading as it is.  They’re going to spend a lot of money on ads, which will create a public perception that’s going to put you on the defensive.

COFFMAN:  Mm-hmm.

ROSEN:  And that’s the way the game is played.

COFFMAN:  It is, unfortunately.

ROSEN:  When are you going to start running ads?

COFFMAN:  Oh, my gosh!  I don’t think we’re going to run ads until next year, until closer to the campaign.  Now, there may be – who knows, if there’s some more conservative groups that are going to step in to counter this, I can’t speak to that.  You know, I don’t know.  But, you know,  it’s obviously disconcerting to see what’s going on, and I hope that it certainly mobilizes conservatives across the state of Colorado and across the country to get involved in the campaign.

ROSEN:  And Coloradoans tend to resent a lot of out-of-state money pouring in to influence local elections, so –.

COFFMAN:  This is just unprecedented, an unprecedented amount.  I mean, it’s normal to have – particularly during the election year, or during the fall campaign, outside groups coming in.  I mean, and I don’t think that’s necessarily a positive feature of American politics.  But what is – but this is abso – I mean, to come in, with a single ad buy for a single ad, from one group at $800,000 in special interest outside money, is unprecedented in the state of Colorado. And I hope the people of Colorado react to it.

ROSEN:  Well, in the meantime, it will be up to people like me.  You don’t have to pay for ads on this show.

COFFMAN:  Well, I’ll be.  Thank you.

ROSEN:  A) I’m biased in your direction, and (B) I understand the devious tactics that groups like this lead.  And I can challenge them on a factual basis.  Mike, best of luck to you!

COFFMAN:  Thanks, Mike!

ROSEN:  When we come back, we’re going to find out how young people are going to game Obamacare.