Editing Cato Institute (section)

===Environmental policy===
Cato scholars have written about the issues of the environment, including global warming, environmental regulation, and energy policy. According to social scientists Riley Dunlap and Aaron McCright the Cato Institute is one of the "particularly crucial elements of the denial machine", that [[climate change denial|rejects global warming]].<ref>Riley E. Dunlap, Aaron M. McCright: ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=RsYr_iQUs6QC&dq=cato+institute+denial&pg=PA144 Organized Climate Change Denial]'', in: John S. Dryzek, Richard B. Norgaard, David Schlosberg (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford University Press 2011, p. 144–160, here p. 149</ref>

[[PolitiFact.com]] and ''[[Scientific American]]'' have called Cato's work on global warming "false" and based on "[[cherrypicking|data selection]]".<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2009/apr/01/cato-institute/cato-institutes-claim-global-warming-disputed-most/ | title=Cato Institutes claim on global warming disputed by most experts | last=Farley | first=Robert | date=1 April 2009 | website=Politifact | access-date=6 February 2020 | archive-date=February 6, 2020 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200206154411/https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2009/apr/01/cato-institute/cato-institutes-claim-global-warming-disputed-most/ | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>Cato was criticized for publishing an alleged misleading ''Addendum: Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States''. See: {{cite journal|last=Fischer|first=Douglas|author2=The Daily Climate|title=Fake Addendum by Contrarian Group Tries to Undo U.S. Government Climate Report|journal=Scientific American|date=October 22, 2012|url=https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fake-addendum-by-contrari/|access-date=February 5, 2018|archive-date=March 6, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180306142529/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fake-addendum-by-contrari/|url-status=live}}</ref>  A December 2003 Cato panel included [[Patrick Michaels]], [[Robert Balling]] and [[John Christy]].{{citation needed|date=August 2016}} Michaels, Balling and Christy agreed that global warming is related at least some degree to [[Human impact on the environment|human activity]] but that many scientists and the media have overstated the danger.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Patrick Michaels: Decades of Denial – Climate Investigations Center |url=https://climateinvestigations.org/patrick-michaels/ |access-date=2022-12-23 |website=climateinvestigations.org}}</ref>{{citation needed|date=August 2016}} The Cato Institute has also criticized political attempts to stop global warming as expensive and ineffective.<ref name="Michaels" />

Cato scholars have been critical of the [[Presidency of George W. Bush|Bush administration]]'s views on energy policy. In 2003, Cato scholars Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren said the Republican Energy Bill was "hundreds of pages of corporate welfare, symbolic gestures, empty promises, and pork-barrel projects".<ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/taylor-vandoren200311190857.asp |title=Mighty Porking Power Rangers: Scanning the energy bill |first=Jerry |last=Taylor |author2=Peter Van Doren |magazine=National Review Online |date=November 19, 2003 |access-date=May 27, 2008 |archive-date=November 12, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071112000604/http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/taylor-vandoren200311190857.asp |url-status=live }}</ref> They also spoke out against the former president's calls for larger ethanol subsidies.<ref>{{cite news |work=Chicago Sun-Times |url=http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=7308 |title=Ethanol Makes Gasoline Costlier, Dirtier |first=Jerry |last=Taylor |author2=Peter Van Doren |date=January 27, 2007 |access-date=January 31, 2008 |archive-date=February 13, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080213153039/http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=7308 |url-status=live }}</ref>

With regard to the [[Takings Clause#Eminent domain|"Takings Clause"]] of the United States Constitution and environmental protection, libertarians associated with Cato contended in 2003 that the Constitution is not adequate to guarantee the protection of private property rights.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ball|first=Terence|title=Environmental Encyclopedia|year=2003|publisher=Gale|chapter-url=http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G2-3404801486.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150402151435/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G2-3404801486.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=April 2, 2015|access-date=August 18, 2013 |chapter=Takings}}</ref>

In 2019, Cato closed its "Center for the Study of Science", which [[Environment & Energy Publishing|E&E News]] characterized as "a program that for years sought to raise uncertainty about climate science" after its head Pat Michaels had left the institute over disagreements, along with his collaborator Ryan Maue, a meteorologist.<ref name="Waldman-2020">{{Cite web|last=Waldman|first=Scott|date=2020-05-29|title=Cato closes its climate shop; Pat Michaels is out|url=https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060419123|access-date=2020-07-28|website=[[Environment & Energy Publishing|E&E News]]|language=en|archive-date=August 15, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190815174415/https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060419123|url-status=live}}</ref> By that time, the Cato Institute was also no longer affiliated with its former distinguished fellow [[Richard Lindzen]], another [[climate change denial|denier of]] the [[scientific consensus on climate change]].<ref name="Waldman-2020" />