"Right now, while scientists see the train coming through the tunnel, most Americans haven't heard the whistle blowing. They don't sense that its out there as a big issue. And I really believe as President, you know, one of my most important jobs is to tell the American people what the big issues are that we have to deal with."

The President and Vice-president, by placing themselves squarely in the camp of environmental concerns, are courting the ire of the fossil fuel industries—oil and coal-- the most aggressive and powerful groupings of financial empires extant.

Already the propaganda machinery of these clout-bearing empires is churning out furious objections to any U.S. concessions that might be made at global warming discussions to be held during a special December meeting of nations in Kyoto, Japan. While a greater number of the world's scientists complain that fossil fuels have caused irreparable harm to earth's protective layers, thereby trapping heat in the atmosphere and causing a rise in temperatures threatening massive climate changes, the fossil fuel industries busily trot out their own "experts" to dispute such complaints.

Last week the White House unexpectedly hosted a nationwide gathering of news broadcasters and, without specifying which stance they should take requested that the spotlights of national attention be focussed on the global warming debate.

Many of these broadcasters, unaccustomed to treatment as significant players in a major life and death drama, reacted positively to the president's plea. Monday's (October 6) White House meeting of greenhouse experts, gathered to help the administration make proposals on the international stage and to equip the U.S. with economically feasible plans, is thus assured of the public's attention. How the global warming issue will be handled by the media, that is whether or not a public ignorant of the facts becomes sufficiently alarmed, remains to be seen.

CNN, taking its responsibilities to the public seemingly seriously, refused to take anti-global pact advertising from the fossil fuels industries. Oil magnates and their puppets promptly accused the news channel of censorship. CNN replied, however, by insisting that such anti-pact advertising could easily compromise its attempt at objective coverage of the global warming issue.

Nobody doubts the financial clout wielded by the oil and coal industries. Already they are threatening American consumers with higher bills should the Kyoto meeting go against the unlimited fuel consumption they would prefer. Few expect in Kyoto that even forceful calls by the Clinton administration for emission reductions will result in any steep or urgent cuts.

Todd Stern, a White House senior staff aide, says, "If anybody tells you this is not a tough issue, they are lying…. We have put together options for the President that are economically viable, that are environmentally viable, and that are politically viable—both in the international and domestic context."

Chairwoman Kathleen A. McGinty, of the Council on Environmental Quality, says: "We have to stand on the rooftops and scream, because there are those who have a vested interest in not seeing action on climate change."

Deeper faster emission cuts are needed, as all environmentally conscious advocates know. The Union of Concerned Scientists, mobilizing 1,500 researchers (including 102 Nobel laureates) has called for massive immediate reductions in fossil fuel usage. Their statement says global warming is "one of the most serious threats to the planet and to future generations."