When it comes to climate change, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul was once thought to be among the most progressive Republicans in the hunt for presidency—a candidate who accepts the science of global warming and supports the need to regulate the emissions causing it.
But late in the second hour of the fourth Republican presidential debate — hosted by Fox Business Network and The Wall Street Journal — Paul appeared to repudiate those principles entirely.
Moderator Maria Bartiromo asked the right question, pressing Paul on how he might grow the economy while meaningfully cutting coal, oil and gas emissions. It’s a bright line between the two parties, with Paul’s Republican rivals believing that the business costs of President Obama’s efforts to cut emissions are too great, and the environmental benefits too few.
But Tuesday night marks the first time this campaign season that Paul has full-throatedly agreed, pushing hard against Martin O’Malley, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, the three Democratic candidates. They support Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which, if it survives legal challenge, would limit — for the first time ever — the amount of carbon power plants can pump into the atmosphere.
As for Paul: “The first thing I would do as president is repeal [the Clean Power Plan].”
In explaining why, Paul veered away from established science, which attributes the vast majority of global warming to human activity.
The average planetary temperature has risen more than a full degree Fahrenheit since the start of the Industrial Revolution, a spike that tracks closely with a sharp rise in carbon emissions.
But Paul isn’t convinced by the science, famously supported by 97 percent of climate scientists and every major scientific body on earth.
“Man may have a role in our climate,” Paul acknowledged, “but I think nature may also have a role.”








