¶ … rift between environmentalism and libertarianism is clear when major issues facing public policy makers are considered. The global energy crisis, which is now taking center stage due to current world events, is one arena in which legislation stalls due to irreconcilable differences. On the one hand, auto manufacturers, dealerships, and consumers of light trucks demand that the government not interfere with the proliferation of vehicles. Reducing emissions standards would be akin to cutting jobs and severely restricting personal freedoms, say the opponents of environmental legislation. Global warming is another issue that garners more dissent than agreement; politicians and scientists can't even agree on the existence of global warming to begin with. It is impossible to establish new laws when there is no agreement on this fundamental issue. In general, enacting legislation that would help improve the environment...

Most of the time, these freedoms and rights are purely economical and self-serving. However, the issue is not cut and dry. Both sides have genuine concerns, gripes, and causes.
Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons" provides an ideal framework from which to view current and future problems concerning environmental legislation. His theory of the "tragedy of the commons" includes the reality of finite resources. The global energy crisis is further proof of the finite supply of oil; therefore the commons is a convenient metaphor for the global oil supply. Huber argues that environmental regulations are too restrictive and will result in a weakening of the economy. He, and other opponents of legislation, agree that establishing environmental legislation increases beurocracy and contributes to "big government" interfering with personal rights and freedoms. Just as Hardin argues that the "freedom to breed is intolerable," he…