Re "Obama's effort to reduce coal is groundbreaking, but not in California" (Editorial, June 3): A review of past efforts to reduce or eliminate significant health impacts, including environmental health, caused by the production and use of chemicals and energy resources all follow an identical course. Industries and businesses that directly profit from such activity claim such efforts cause economic peril and lasting injury and deny the scientific and medical evidence of harm.
History has proven that these cries of economic demise have been largely exaggerated and the resulting health benefits under-predicted. The views expressed by those opposed to reducing carbon pollution can also be copied and used near-verbatim from historical files by replacing a few key terms with the word "carbon." The debate on the merits of regulatory action to reduce carbon pollution is diminished when made partisan and should instead focus on its cost and benefit ratio.
-- Daniel Fong, Rancho Cordova