Campus Political Groups Debate Environmental Policy

The temperature rose last night as the Harvard College Democrats and the Harvard Republican Club clashed in a debate over the future of American environmental policy that was hosted by the Harvard Political Union.

Democrat Anthony P. Dedousis ’11 opened the debate by highlighting what he said were the failings of the Bush administration, arguing that the White House “has spent the last eight years surreptitiously destroying pillars of environmental regulation.”

“We must spearhead the effort to craft a new, post-Kyoto climate change treaty,” Dedousis said. “The era of unlimited carbon emissions is over.”

Republican Colin J. Motley ’10 countered by saying that environmental regulations could damage the economy.

“The power to do good is also the power to do harm,” Motley said, quoting famed economist Milton Friedman. “A commitment to economic growth and development should not be compromised in the name of ‘being green.’”

Present in the crowd was Institute of Politics fellow David R. Zwick—the former president of Clean Water Action, a conservation organization—and a delegation of approximately 60 students who are visiting from multiple Asian nations as part of the Harvard College in Asia Program (HCAP).

The debate became especially relevant to the visiting students as it turned to U.S. policy on international treaties and the role of developing nations within their frameworks.

“China is the enemy to them,” said Democrat Elise Liu ’11, criticizing the Republican stance of refusing to join climate change treaties unless developing nations do so as well. “That’s not how we can approach the Kyoto problem.”

As an intense back-and-forth between Liu and Motley ensued, the debate even veered into issues of international trade.

“Who is truly demonizing China,” Motley asked, “the Republicans proposing free trade with China or those who propose protectionist measures against China?”

There were brief moments when the debate took a lighter tone.

After Liu, who is a member of The Crimson’s editorial board, excused herself for using a laptop at the podium, Republican Mark Isaacson ’11 seized the opportunity to make a jab at his opponent.

“You’ll have to excuse the paper,” he said. “I like to save energy.”

Reactions among the visiting students were mixed, though the debaters were criticized for presenting a muddled picture.

“They were quite schizophrenic,” said Goh Huishan, an HCAP delegate from Singapore. “Their points kept running into each other. There wasn’t really a clear Republican stance or a Democratic stance.”

Fellow Singapore delegate Maria S. Joseph, who described herself as “Democrat-leaning,” added that while “the Republicans showed a united front, [the] Democrats kept cutting into and contradicting each other.”

—Staff writer Vidya B. Viswanathan can be reached at viswanat@fas.harvard.edu.