The Swine Line: The Staff Blog of Citizens Against Government Waste

We Won't Always Have Paris

The Swine Line is the staff blog of Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW). For questions, contact blog@cagw.org.

Yesterday, President Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Treaty or, as it is often called, the Paris Accord.  He righted what has been a bone of contention since the agreement's birth at the Paris climate change meeting in November 2015.  Many senators and policy analysts have rightfully argued the climate agreement was a treaty and should have been submitted to the Senate for advice and consent, as the Constitution requires.  But, President Obama did not want to submit it to the Senate because he knew it would not be ratified.  Instead, he continued his executive overreach and implemented the policy illegally with his “pen and his phone.”  Chris Horner and Marlo Lewis of the Competitive Enterprise Institute discuss in their May 2017 report the serious legal and economic consequences to the U.S. if President Obama’s actions were not reversed.

The agreement, according to the United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, “brings all nations into a common cause to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its effects.”  In reality, the agreement would have been a giant transfer of wealth from the United States to developing countries, primarily through the Green Climate Fund and an attack on our sovereignty.  Only developed countries, such as the U.S., were required to provide funding of $100 billion per year by 2020.  In fact, President Obama committed $3 billion to the fund without Congressional approval and had already provided $1 billion, paying $500 million just days before he left office.  With a debt of $20 trillion, American taxpayers should not be subsidizing foreign countries’ energy needs.

The treaty forced unrealistic and drastic goals for reducing U.S. carbon emissions, that would have harmed our economy and ability to grow and create jobs, while countries like China and India could get away with doing little to reduce their fossil fuel use.  Even if one believes global warming is largely caused by man’s activities on earth, the agreement would do very little to to reverse the earth’s temperature.  Bjorn Lomborg, head of the Copenhagen Consensus Center and author of the book “The Skeptical Environmentalist,” analyzed that if all the countries met their emission goals (which is highly unlikely) it would prevent a total temperature rise of only 0.3° F by 2100.

And what would have been the result if the U.S. had stayed in the treaty?  According to NERA Consulting, an international economic consulting firm, the agreement would cause the U.S. to lose 6.5 million industrial sector jobs and cost our economy nearly $3 trillion by 2040.

It’s a good thing we are out of it.  Thank you President Trump.

Sign Up for Email Updates!Click Here!

View Archives

Posts by Tag

Big Government (155) Waste (72) Budget (67) Obamacare (64) Congress (60) Healthcare (60) Uncategorized (56) Telecommunications (49) Debt (46) Deficit (44) Technology (42) Internet (41)