Gary Forsee

Just in case you were wondering about the importance of Gary Forsee's letter to Republican efforts to undermine federal energy legislation, this should clear it up for you:

Missouri Congressman Roy Blunt, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, today [December 8] backed University of Missouri President Gary D. Forsee’s contention that the "proposed cap and trade model will significantly increase the energy expenditures for all four of our campuses" in a letter to Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (Calif.).

Never mind that Forsee isn't actually contesting Waxman's analysis of his bill -- Forsee is actually expressing relief that he was wrong. 

And never mind that the chairman of the MU Environmental Affairs and Sustainability Committee said their misunderstanding of the facts about the bill is a "little embarrassing" and "We've been wrangling with an issue we didn’t quite understand. We need to really get our facts straight and get the details of the bill fully under control before making any statement about opposing or supporting the legislation." 

Never mind all that -- Blunt is 'backing' Forsee in the dispute.

I really don't understand this argument from UM System President Gary Forsee (also articulated last week by Rep. Chris Kelly):

[Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry] Waxman’s rebuttal was "in some ways" beside the point, Forsee said Monday. His letter was intended to convey the message that a cash-strapped public university system would be hard pressed to handle new unfunded energy mandates — whatever the costs...

For all the fuss his letter stirred up, Forsee may have partly accomplished his goal. The university system now has Waxman’s written assurance that its power plant in Columbia isn’t a “covered entity” under the legislation. That sounds a lot like the exemption Forsee was seeking.

The factual problems with his letter are not beside the point.  Unless I'm missing something, Forsee didn't secure an exemption with his letter – the exemption existed all along, and he just didn't know what he was talking about.

Imagine Forsee wrote a letter to Congress expressing concern about the Martians living in his brain.  If he's politely informed that there aren't actually Martians inside his skull, his letter would not be hailed as an "incredible success" -– it would still have been a silly letter. 

The Tribune's Janese Heavin has the scoop on a really interesting development in the story of Gary Forsee's opposition to federal clean energy legislation. For several days, he's sustained criticism for lending support to the Republican efforts to kill the legislation. Then yesterday, things got a whole lot worse for the President of the UM System when it was reveled that the calculations at the core of this opposition were incorrect.

In light of these facts, Forsee began to walk back his opposition at a Mizzou campus town hall earlier today, and reaffirmed his support for reducing carbon emissions.

The Tribune reports this afternoon that U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has responded to UM System President Gary Forsee's letter opposing federal clean energy and climate bill.  It turns out that Forsee's calculations, put together by the Director of Energy Management at MU, are based on an inaccurate understanding the the proposed legislation.

The numbers were based on Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration estimates and calculated based on the assumption MU would have to initially buy up to 30 percent of the greenhouse gas allowances, according to information from Paul Hoemann, director of university energy management.

University of Missouri students, faculty and alumni joined together in Columbia this afternoon to rally for comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation outside of UM System President Gary Forsee’s University Hall office. A few photos:

A new cartoon from John Darkow, posted yesterday at ColumbiaTribune.com. 

A coalition of student groups -- including Coal Free Mizzou (Beyond Coal), Greeks Going Green and the College Dems -- is joining together with faculty at 1pm tomorrow to rally for comprehensive clean energy legislation outside Gary Forsee's office at University Hall. 

More information about the event is on Facebook here. 

Following up on my post from Sunday, Janese Heavin has a story today for the Daily Tribune outlining UM System President Gary Forsee's various stock holdings and ties to corporations.  Essentially, Forsee's response to questions about his financial interest in Great Plains Energy -- an energy holding company that is actively opposing federal climate legislation --  is that he'll still be rich no matter what happens.  I don't doubt that a bit, but this quote from his official spokesman has me scratching my head:

Forsee serves on the board of Great Plains Energy, the holding company of Kansas City Power & Light, which opposes the bill that would limit greenhouse gas emissions. That’s not a conflict of interest, Hollingshead said, because board members do not lobby on legislative matters.

Why does it matter if Forsee lobbies while wearing his Great Plains hat?  The point is that he's using his official position to advance a position that would benefit Great Plains stockholders and boardmembers, like himself.  And the larger point is that his public advocacy against the legislation contradicts his previous commitments regarding clean energy, and is effectively a call to maintain the status quo.  

The Tribune: 

Faculty members were taken by surprise when they read in the Tribune that [University of Missouri System President Gary] Forsee sent a letter opposing the bill, said Dan Hooley, a professor of classical studies and chairman of MU’s Environmental Affairs and Sustainability Committee.

“He seems to be speaking unilaterally but did not consult with faculty members or the community and with no explanation of his process of thinking,” Hooley said. “It seems to me he does have every right to speak for himself, but he simply can’t speak for the community. That’s not how this campus operates.”

Jason Rosenbaum has a very interesting nugget in the Columbia Business Times blog today about UM System president Gary Forsee's decision to oppose federal climate legislation:

University of Missouri system president Gary Forsee’s letter opposing federal legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions is still attracting attention several weeks after it was released to the media.

Paul Sloca, the spokesman for U.S. Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer, R-St. Elizabeth, circulated Forsee’s letter to media outlets earlier this month. The letter came out against “Cap and Trade” legislation, which in a nutshell would cap the amount of carbon emissions an entity could produce. If that company or service wants to go over that amount, they would have to buy credits from entities that produce less pollution.

As noted Tuesday, University of Missouri System President Gary Forsee is publicly opposing the comprehensive energy legislation being debated in Congress despite his previous promises to be leader in new technologies, clean energy, and responsible environmental policies. 

In addition to questions about why he's chosen to stand down from his commitments and stand up for the status quo, Forsee also has a few questions to answer about potential personal conflicts of interest.

When Forsee isn't serving as President of the University of Missouri system or thinking about how to spent some portion of his enormous Sprint Nextel severance package, he also sits on the the Board of Directors for Great Plains Energy Incorporated, the holding company of Kansas City Power & Light and KCP&L Greater Missouri Operations Company. 

KCP&L, as you may know, is actively opposing the Congressional climate legislation, saying it would force them to reduce their emissions too quickly and might force them to "retire some portion of our coal-fired fleet."

Rush Limbaugh says he's made "a really gutsy and courageous move."

For more on Gary Forsee's surprising and disappointing change of heart on federal climate legislation, check out this rundown at Show Me Progress and the previous Fired Up! coverage. 

University of Missouri System President Gary Forsee is opposing federal climate legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions, citing concerns about how the bill might impact the system's energy budget. 

While it's understandable that Forsee is concerned about the budget, universities should be leading the charge for sensible energy and climate policy -- and most certainly not fighting for the status quo.

What's more, Forsee's new position completely contradicts his previous commitments as a signatory to the the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment.  That call for robust new energy policies reads (emphasis added):

We, the undersigned presidents and chancellors of colleges and universities, are deeply concerned about the unprecedented scale and speed of global warming and its potential for large-scale, adverse health, social, economic and ecological effects. We recognize the scientific consensus that global warming is real and is largely being caused by humans. We further recognize the need to reduce the global emission of greenhouse gases by 80% by mid-century at the latest, in order to avert the worst impacts of global warming and to reestablish the more stable climatic conditions that have made human progress over the last 10,000 years possible.

While we understand that there might be short-term challenges associated with this effort, we believe that there will be great short-, medium-, and long-term economic, health, social and environmental benefits, including achieving energy independence for the U.S. as quickly as possible.