FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Contact: Chris Horner
Chris.Horner@ATI.org
Texas Tech ignores request for Gingrich book records
Controversial activist professor claims to have spent 100+ hours on chapter suddenly dropped from upcoming book
WASHINGTON — American Tradition Institute, a non-profit research institute dedicated to restoring science, liberty and accountability to the environmental debate, filed on Dec. 10 a Public Information Act request with Texas Tech University relating to collaboration on a book, using public time and resources, between “climate” activist Professor Katharine Hayhoe and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich.
Texas Tech was to produce responsive records by early last week. To date, ATI has not received a response.
“This is a matter of significant public interest, as Mr. Gingrich’s views and past activism on the ‘climate’ issue receive scrutiny by voters seeking to assess his judgment and compatibility with their views,” said Chris Horner, ATI’s Senior Director of Litigation.
Hayhoe, who preaches that human activity is destroying the climate and that Christian stewardship compels acceptance of the ‘climate’ agenda, had been publicly identified as a contributor to Gingrich’s forthcoming book “Environmental Entrepreneurs.” Hayhoe had gained notoriety for urging evangelical Christians into supporting the controversial, costly and according to all computer models, climatically meaningless ‘climate’ agenda. News outlets now report that Gingrich, under fire for his left-of-center views on the environment from presidential competitors and Tea Party activists, quickly deep-sixed Hayhoe’s chapter last week.
“Nice to hear that Gingrich is tossing my #climate chapter in the trash. 100+ unpaid hrs I cd’ve spent playing w my baby,” Hayhoe posted on her Twitter account Dec. 30.
ATI requested all emails to or from any Texas Tech email account used by Hayhoe (including as “cc”,) and either or both Gingrich and his co-author Terry Maple.
ATI also requested all emails sent or received by Hayhoe citing or referring to one or more of the following: Newt Gingrich (or “Newt” or “Gingrich”), Terry Maple (or “Terry”, or “Maple”), American Solutions (including in the email address/domain), and/or “Environmental Entrepreneurs”.
With time of the essence and the law very clear, ATI questions any further delays by Texas Tech in coming into compliance with its obligations, and calls on the university to promptly produce these records the public paid for and have a right to see.
# # #
—
American Tradition Institute
Tom Tanton, Acting Executive Director
…since this is sorta political
It’s just all about the republicans right now. And the republican candidates are no better or worse than what the democrats had to offer.
You guys remember when it was all about the democrats?
They had one candidate, ‘ol hoof in mouth, that thought Obama was clean.
Another candidate that was busy as he could be making illegitimate children and paying for it.
Another candidate that channeled Mariah Carey, the head bobbing and weaving thing, every time she was in front of a black person….and told lies about almost everything she did
..and finally a candidate that thought there was 58 states, and most of them were clinging to their guns and religion
So cheer up!….I’m not paying one bit of attention to any of it…..every republican candidate is better than what we’ve got now
We’re all going in, going straight down the republican ticket, and walking out, no matter who it is…..LOL
Johanna:
Given Newt’s [SNIP: If you have evidence, show it, but that sort of statement is defamatory and under the pending SOPT legislation would leave sites like this very vulnerable. Please stick to the topic. -REP].
This is not really out of character for Gingrich. He has a habit of latching onto pseudo-intellectual fads of the moment.
This is why he’s so dangerous. Most other politicians are just crooks. He strikes me as being a massive egotist and delusional, not a combination you ever want int a president.
Doug Proctor says:
January 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm
We – all of us, not just the voting American public – have a right to know when our “leaders” are lying to us. Bush/Blair got the West into Iraq with out-and-out lies about Saddam and his non-existent WMD. If Newt is lying when he says he supports CO2 legislation but doesn’t, the pro-agenda people have a right to know he lies, and if he is lying when he says he doesn’t support the legislation, the anti-agenda people have a right to know that, too.
The FOIA concept is to stop the lying endemic in public discourse by letting the potential liers know the truth will out. If they stump for a position, they’d better have done their homework and stand by their conclusions. Yes, there is a danger in shutting down the process by overwhelming the system with requests, some of which will be frivolous. But that is because, until now, access to records has been difficult, slow and easy to discourage. Lies, manipulations and deceit have worked very well to keep the political machines running – consider Blair’s admission that the British FOIA, in his opinion, interferes with “good” government. Only when enough politicians and others with personal and business agendas feel real threat should they step over the line, will the line-crossing reduce.
Accountability should be the price for power and position. The FOIA laws are the first tool any of us outside of the inner circles have of implementing what should, morally, be already commonplace.
—————–
The system could be overwhelmed by the FOIA process only because the government is too big. There is so much money and so much power at stake it must be questioned in every area each and every day . FOIA is the proper way to legally monitor the activities of our elected and paid employees. That’s what the rules say. If our government has gotten so big and what we need to see causes grief for some then so be it. It’s what we must do. No government should ever be trusted.
old engineer says:
January 1, 2012 at 3:40 pm
“The ATI is apparently trying to expose Newt as agreeing with Prof. Hayhoe. But, Prof. Hayhoe seems perfectly comfortable with her views, whether Newt agrees with her or not. So this all about ATI going after Newt. Not about FOI.”
Look at the post:
“American Tradition Institute, a non-profit research institute dedicated to restoring science, liberty and accountability to the environmental debate, filed on Dec. 10 a Public Information Act request with Texas Tech University”
When ATI was filing the request Gingrich and Hayhoe were still a team.
johanna says:
January 1, 2012 at 4:02 pm
Observation from afar – Newt is probably way the smartest of the contenders, but he seems to lack a moral, or even political, compass. What was he thinking getting involved with Hayhoe in the first place?
—————–
johanna, Hayhoe can’t be any worse that Pelosi or Sharpton.
My problem with Newt is that of all the contenders he IS the true insider. He’s be standing next to the top tier. I really don’t want another beltway bandit as my president.
I meant he be or was it He’s been?
REP:
LOL. Likely you’re quite correct. I wonder what Newt’s opinion on the pending legislation is. Just think of all the escapades the politicians could get up to with no worries of the public ever being aware.
This entire thread would probably not exist under that legislation. Or the FOIA request itself either.
East Germany’s STASI would *adore* the internet. And facebook. And twitter. Lots of information out there for the asking. No need to bother neighbors or family about learning the details.
Hey Daryl,
you left out the “/sarc” at the end. !!
No big deal. Just more of the same. Newt Gingrich will not be the next POTUS. The time has past for this faux intellectual and faux conservative to carry any real weight. I will grant him this — he is an excellent orator and debater. This country needs more of that like it needs another bank failure.
You have to hand it to him for political prowess. He went from a deserted and failed campaign right into first place. Talk about miraculous comes backs! I credit it to sheer force of debate persona. But that anomaly is over.
Ok, having read her schtick about ‘what would jesus do about global warming’ i have to say she’s one of those nutjobs that turns me off both religion and politics.
Essentially, if i’m reading her correctly, I live in the first (developed) world i have access to technology and convenience not found in the third world (due to corruption and do gooding westerners). And, since ‘that’s not fair!’ (whiny tone), if I turn on my light switch to cook my dinner in my electric stove and wash my dishes with warm water, it will make the baby jesus cry.
Well, that logic just makes ME cry. What’s she going to do about THAT unfairness?
FOIA away, she’s clearly of the opinion that she’s the one single Joan of Arc of global warming.
I’m willing to bet SHE turns on her electric light switches to cook HER dinner in her modern stove and washes HER dishes with running water. Bet she has a water seal toilet too. Will the baby jesus *ever* get over that! Repent professor, repent!
A lot of evangelicals have been on the Carbon bandwagon for a long time. They started up the Green Train in 1968 with Hal Lindsey’s “Late Great Planet Earth”, long before it was a major secular cause.
Clearly they enjoy advising their late-coming secular buddies like Newt and Nancy. It’s all one big Apocalyptic Revival Tent!
Joe Ptak
This is horribly off topic but you really need to read this before singing Rick Perry’s praises.
http://non-intervention.com/1018/iowa%e2%80%99s-choice-dr-paul-or-u-s-bankruptcy-more-wars-and-many-more-dead-soldiers-and-marines/
Good luck for Nov 2012 America but I would say that whatever Newt Gingrich thinks about global warming is absolutely immaterial except that it may lengthen his odds even more UNLESS Mitt Romney gets hit by a bus.
Current William Hill Odds Next US Presidential Election Winner
Barack Obama 4/5
Mitt Romney (man of all seasons?) 6/4
Newt Gingrich 16/1
Rick Santorum (sceptic?) 50/1
As much as I do not agree with all of Mr Obama’s policies, he made me quite a lot of money on the last election. I think I might re-invest.
(Two of Romney’s comments on global warming – “I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course. But I believe the world is getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that. I don’t know how much our contribution is to that, because I know there have been periods of greater heat and warmth in the past, but I believe that we contribute to that. So I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.”
“My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us. My view with regards to energy policy is pretty straightforward. I want us to become energy secure and independent of the oil cartels. And that means let’s aggressively develop our oil, our gas, our coal, our nuclear power.”) Plus:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20127273-503544/mitt-romneys-shifting-views-on-climate-change/
Newt will not be president, Obama and the democrats will slaughter him on the whole character issue.
Romney has ZERO chance to win the south, and if you can’t win the south as a republican, you are not going to win the election.
Rick Perry? Please. He’s certifiably insane.
Plan on 4 more years of Obama.
I am not defending or endorsing any candidate for any office (yet), but an elected representative of the people should represent his/her constituency. And somebody once said something to effect of “When the facts change, my position may change.” Re-evaluation of a position is not only the right but also the DUTY of citizens and their representatives.
At one time I was convinced that CO2 and DDT (at different times) were serious problems, but careful examination of “new information” caused me to change my position. I would hope that elected representatives were capable of the same re-evaluation. If the majority of those represented change their position (on any topic), it should be an obligation of the elected to reconsider their position in order to represent the views of the electors. Sometimes a “flip-flop” is justified, and the right thing to do.
At this point in the campaign, I am trying to keep an open mind (and ears and eyes) for viable alternatives to the incumbents.
MattN says:
January 1, 2012 at 6:46 pm
Plan on 4 more years of Obama.
==================================
Hardly……
approx 50% of the registered voters, did not vote in the last election
Obama got approx 50% of the vote and so did McCain….
approx 25% and 25%
No liberal voter in this country sat out the last election….
and Obama’s 66 million votes was all of them
…the 50% that did not vote were conservative republicans
No one in this country has changed from conservative to liberal, or did not
vote for Obama last time and has changed to Obama this time.
Obama did not pay anyone’s mortgage………..
…and every conservative in this country will vote this time
Well, since everyone is expressing political opinons I will go with mine. Restore America Now! Ron Paul 2012!
Oh, and if you have not seen this video, I would definately check it out. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8NhRPo0WAo
I am quite certain that taxpayers in the great state of Texas will vehemently disagree.
Perhaps if the Congress, with its well-known penchant for selecting misleading names for legislation, had chosen a different moniker, like FOTFIA Freedom of Taxpayer Funded Information Act, then there might be less apprehension at using this ‘FOIA’ tool. Considering the track record thus far for the release of data from the AGW cult, the last thought that would cross my mind at this point would be that FOIA requests might “eventually hurt our ability (and credibility) to demand more important things like code and raw data”. Any FOIA request is one too many to the information gatekeepers.
Anyway, what’s the worst that could happen? The bean counters at taxpayer funded colleges might sharpen their pencils and do their jobs? The (so-called) scientists might hesitate and think twice before sucking up globs of taxpayer grants? If the threat of FOIA requests has a chilling effect on rent-seekers that use taxpayer funded grants then it would be not just a good thing, but a GREAT thing! These taxpayer funded avenues of financing research, particularly controversial AGW propaganda ridden research, should never be the choice of first resort – but the last resort. The more strings attached the better I say.
Daryl McCann says:
January 1, 2012 at 3:57 pm
3. Pledge to reduce our CO2 emissions by 50% within the next five years. (Effectively, their next term in office.)
A Politician’s pledge is meaningless. If a trades-person misrepresents what they will provide in return for valuable consideration , they can be charged with a criminal offense and go to jail.
If a Politicians tells you they will cut CO2 in return for your vote, and then once in office they do the opposite, there is nothing “illegal” with that. It is simply politics. Ask the folks in Oz. Ask the folks in Guantanamo. A politician can tell you any lie they want to gain office.
Gingrich keeps some strange company.
Maybe Newt actually read what she was going to put in the book and came to his senses.
I can imagine a quick review and a “holly crap” moment.
“”””” Pat Moffitt says:
January 1, 2012 at 12:47 pm
I’m not exactly sure where I draw the line for FOIA and while this example may be legally within FOIA’s scope- to me- this request falls into the “Did you really need to send an FOIA about this?” I worry similar FOIA’s may eventually hurt our ability (and credibility) to demand more important things like code and raw data sets. “””””
Well Pat, I think you have it entirely backward. I think it is the interractions between special interest groups and individuals, and government officials, both elected, and unelected beurocrats who make decisions that affect ALL (Americans anyway) that the public (American) has a right to know, under the FOIA doctrine; and especially when taxpayer funds are in play in the derivation or dissemination of said information.
I’m less interested in seeing computer code and raw data from supposedly scientific endeavors; but I reserve the right to take with a grain of salt, any claimed results that are not supported by freely released data, that the creators of consider proprietary; as they say, those people of all people should know just what their stuff is worth. Anonymous postings are worth every bit of the belief that their own author feels proud to put hiser name to.
Newt’s problem is as clear as the nose on his face: he thinks he is a genius. And all who think they are geniuses know that geniuses are above the laws, mores, and traditions that bind the rest of us in our petty paces.
It is truly rare that I write something that I know is absolutely true. What a rush!
Well the founding fathers and framers of the Constitution knew what they were doing when they devised a system for having the several States of the Union select a President to manage the Union.
Think of the pickle we’d be in if it was left up to the people to choose a leader as they do in Democracies. We’d probably end up with an Oprah Winfrey or Michael Jackson for the CIC of the world’s most significant super military.
The current primary season looks exactly like an Italian firing squad; figuratively; the only difference is that the incumbent opposition, is entirely outside the circle, and not being addressed by anyone.
Most of these candidates spin much more readily than wind turbines; for what we are about to receive, the American voters will be the last to accept reponsibility for what they do at the voting machine.