You are on page 1of 2

Senator XXX State Capitol Room #### Lincoln, NE 68509 RE: LB 583 Dear Senator XXX: Today I write

to you as one of the 32 Senators who voted for my priority bill, LB583, which requires the Climate Assessment and Response Committee (CARC) to generate a study about the effects of climate change on Nebraska with an emphasis on agriculture, the number one industry in the state. CARC has generated a Request for Information (RFI) that violates both the explicit language and the intent of LB583. I hope that you decide to join me in urging CARC and the Nebraska Department of Agriculture to reconsider their actions. As you may recall, during the debate on LB583, an amendments offered by Senator McCoy and Senator Larson were adopted which inserted the word cyclical before climate change. I supported this amendment with the intention of taking politics out of bill and making the focus on science and how climate change, regardless of its cause, will impact us here in Nebraska. For this purpose, cyclical was not defined in LB583. Unfortunately it appears that politics may be interfering with the purpose and intent of LB583. You have probably read in the papers about the Nebraska Department of Agriculture issuing a RFI, in response to the request by CARC, which attempted to define what cyclical in LB583 means. I have attached a copy of the RFI and related news article for your reference. This is contrary to the plain language of LB583 which requires a synthesis and assessment of the state of knowledge on: Historical climate variability and change; climate projections; and possible impacts to key sectors of the state such as agriculture, water, wildlife and, ecosystems, forests and outdoor recreation. The attempt to create a definition of the word cyclical beyond its ordinary meaning and making it the focus of the entire report is contrary to the language of LB583. Rules of statutory construction require Courts to give words their plain and ordinary meaning, and read them in a manner that is consistent, harmonious and sensible. Appropriate statutory construction also requires avoiding an absurd result. The RFI requires consideration of factors such as volcanic eruptions and solar variations, neither of which are consistent with the statutory language and both of which would lead to absurd results. The results of such a study would be meaningless to the Legislature and the

industries in Nebraska who are trying to prepare for the future. It is my understanding that the University of Nebraska will not consider bidding on a study with such a limited scope and one which doesnt allow scientists to examine any and all causes of climate change, as this RFI does. It was my intent as the introducer of LB 583 that the study look at all causes of climate change equally and I accepted the amendment from Senator McCoy with good faith that it would not limit the study in either direction. I am writing you, as a supporter of LB583, to ask that you add your name to request that the Department of Agriculture reconsider the RFI and amend it to eliminate the paragraph that attempts to add language defining cyclical beyond the terms of the statute and relevant legislative history. I do not want $44,000 of the publics money wasted on an unscientific study which will not help the citizens and industries of Nebraska prepare for the effects of climate change. I have also attached the peer reviewed NebGuide, Climate Change: What does it mean for Nebraska? published by the University of Nebraska, October 2013, as an example of what a CARC study, done with scientific merit, could be and how it could benefit Nebraska. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Please let me or my office know if you wish to add your name to support science and the true intent of LB 583. Sincerely,

Senator Ken Haar District 21 Cc: Climate Assessment and Response Committee News media University of Nebraska Lincoln

You might also like