NTF Issue paper: president3.doc. 6-17.

BACKGROUND. President Trump has withdrawn the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accords, which took effect in November, 2016, and intelligently pledges to renegotiate this international agreement in a way that protects American jobs, taxpayers, and our economy. If foreign nations refuse to renegotiate a more equitable agreement, then we will tackle climate change alone. The President delivered his speech to cabinet members and conservative supporters in the White House Rose Garden. Trump is rightly skeptical of discredited man-made global warming and UN schemes aimed to ameliorate it. He further pledged to end U.S. funding for the UN climate bureaucracy. Trump was withering in his criticism of the pact, which he called a humiliating defeat for American workers that unfairly advantaged foreign countries. He accused foreign nations of playing us for suckers and demanded fair treatment. Trump with his “America First” policy is carrying out his pledge to the voters who elected him. He safeguarded the American people from foreign interference. The President immediately ceased implementation of the Accord and its harsh financial economic burdens, including financial contributions to the UN Green Climate Fund, a massive redistribution of U.S. wealth to other countries, and reporting carbon use data. The Obama Regime already had wasted $1 billion to prop up energy projects in foreign countries. U.S. taxpayers have noted how green energy subsidies here fail to deliver on pledges to create permanent jobs and lower energy costs.

THE TRUMP REASONING. President Trump believes that his predecessor set a dangerous precedent by joining the Paris Accords without obtaining Senate advice and consent. He finds the Accords basic policy objectives incompatible with his pro-growth energy agenda. Staying in would have increased the litigation risks to the U.S. government and companies. The Accords promised no real mitigation of climate risks in future while imposing huge economic burdens on Americans. If the U.S. remained in the Accords, American leaders would suffer continuous pressure from foreign governments, multinational bureaucrats, and their media and environment radical allies to adopt unworkable domestic climate policies. Trump always has recognized the fraud perpetrated by global warming alarmists. His decision evidenced a clear understanding of the fact that many scientists disagree with the UN global warming theory. His selection of a climate realist to head the EPA proves that he will rein in climate hysteria. Trump exposed the infamous global warming emails that named tax-funded leftwing scientists who conspired to hide the decline in world temperatures and destroyed data in violation of freedom of information laws. The anti-carbon carpetbaggers who accrue millions in taxpayer grants and subsidies will lose their income.

THE TRUMP ENDEAVOR: Trump Inauguration speech excerpt: For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry, subsidized the armies of other countries, while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military. We’ve defended other nations’ borders while refusing to defend our own. And spent trillions and trillions of dollars overseas while America’s infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay. We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength and confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon. One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores, with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers who were left behind. The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world, but that is the past, and now we are looking only to the future. We are assembled here today issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power, from this day forward, a new vision will govern our land, from this day forward, it’s going to be only America first. America first. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs will be made to benefit American workers and American families. We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies, and destroying our jobs.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Our President wants to empower Americans again. He has faith in the ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit that he used to become a billionaire. He believes in opportunity, because he knows that opportunities make society progress, and progress drives more ingenuity. The future Trump envisions for American coal, gas, and oil producers and energy-intensive manufacturers has no place in a world organized by the Paris Accords. The Accords are incompatible with the Trump objective to achieve U.S. energy dominance by lifting regulatory obstacles to energy innovation, exploration, and development. As his presidency changes the direction of U.S. policy, he will ensure that future presidents cannot resume the Obama energy debacle.

Every president takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution. Staying in the Accords would undermine our Constitution. The Accords are a treaty by any reasonable criteria. Yet, Obama enrolled the U.S. without obtaining the advice and consent of 2/3rds of the Senate (Article II, Section 2), as constitutionally required, because the Senate never would have approved it. He merely tried to force its implementation by executive orders. Therefore, we have no legal obligation to abide by Obama decrees. The Red Chinese phony parliament voted, as did elected bodies in most other signatory nations. The Obama evasion would set a dangerous precedent, unless Trump nullified it. This administration can disregard the Obama climate targets and enact its own climate legislation in conjunction with Congress.

DECISION CRITICS. Immediately after the announcement, the Chicken Little leaders of bogus global warming began their whining and fearmongering about impending world disaster. Liberal leaders of Canada and France protested. The announcement created immediate massive U.S. and international leftist howling and non-spontaneous demonstrations. They hate Trump, because he seeks to put America First, after previous presidents steadily surrendered our sovereignty to globalists. Globalism redistributes wealth, taking assets from Americans and giving it to foreigners and foreign nations. The liberal media pumped out fake news, grossly distorting the meaning and context of climate change presidential comments. These propaganda machines for the Left dishonestly reported Trump comments. They claimed that the U.S. could not legally withdraw from the agreement. Because the U.S. Senate never ratified this quasi-treaty as required by our Constitution, the UN agreement signed by President Obama was legally worthless. Liberal media sources had reported with glee that Trump was reversing his stance on global warming, that he had accepted the liberal theories, and that he had broken his promise to conservative supporters to exit the Paris Accords. The Left seeks to drive wedges between Trump and his base by lying that he breaks his campaign promises. Former Pres. Obama decried the decision and urged states, cities, and businesses to ignore the withdrawal. Liberal states, cities, and businesses now threaten to bond together and submit to the Paris Accords. Apparently, they ignore the Logan Act, a federal law since 1799 that forbids such ex parte diplomacy. Hollywood liberals are suffering a meltdown. Bloomberg Philanthropies has committed $14 million to nullifying withdrawal. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi implied erroneously that withdrawal from the Accords would strip the EPA of its authority to regulate genuine pollutants, with disastrous health consequences. “Ozone Al” Gore, a frequent climate alarmist, decried the decision. Climate litigation attorneys and activist judges will cite previous American commitment in court cases challenging the Trump decisions to repeal onerous EPA regulations. Leftist plaintiffs will place the actions of our government or private companies in an international climate change policy context. Many Accords proponents warn that America now will suffer carbon tariffs, but calculating and taxing the carbon footprint of trading goods would require a new IRS to manage it, dramatically expanding the administrative state.

CREDIBLE SUPPORTERS. 21 GOP senators requested the President to quickly exit from the Accords. House Speaker Paul Ryan called the Accords a raw deal for America and praised the President for withdrawing. National tea parties endorsed the presidential action. Popular positive opinion outside the D.C. Beltway is solid. The supporting Heartland Institute re-released a skeptical 2015 climate report that featured 4,000 peer-reviewed articles debunking UN global warming theories. Leading scientists celebrated the Trump decision for restoring honesty in science. MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen, respected Princeton U. physicist Freeman Dyson, and Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever all agree with Trump. Penn U. geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack stated that none of the Accords strategies has the remotest chance of changing climate, that if the world faced a climate catastrophe and we relied on the Accords, we would face doom.

ACCORD FLAWS. The agreement would have had no discernible effect on global temperatures. Though Chicken Littles warn that the world will suffer blazing temperatures from the pullout decision, MIT estimates that the Paris Accords would lower global temperatures by only .2 degrees Celsius by 2100. If all Accords signatories fulfill every pledge by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be .086F by 2100, too little to affect weather patterns or polar bear populations. Meanwhile, U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) loss would total about $250 billion in 2025, increasing to $420 billion per year on average with a cumulative loss of $4 trillion between 2022 and 2031. These losses would cause economic hardships for millions of Americans. Obama climate scheming was destroying our economy, making companies noncompetitive because of added expense to produce products, thousands of factories closing, and lower economic production. The agreement imposed a goal of reducing U.S. carbon emissions by about 30% over a decade. The resulting Obama regulations would have increased energy prices for heating and air conditioning, vehicle fuel, lawn mowers, and household appliances. The U.S. would have lost 2.7 million jobs by 2025, including 440,000 manufacturing jobs. Jobs would wash from America to 3rd World nations. By 2040, production would fall in many industries, particularly a 38% cut in iron and steel, 31% in natural gas, which is fast becoming a fuel of choice by utilities, and 86% for coal. Total economic cost would reach $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million industrial jobs. The only means to impose high European energy prices on U.S. businesses was to pressure the U.S. to adopt European energy policies. Meanwhile, Red China and India could continue adding coal-fired power plants. The Accords asked signatory nations only for non-binding commitments. Red China committed to reducing emissions by 2030, when its economic development would have caused such to happen regardless. China emits more carbon dioxide than any other country, now twice as much as the U.S. The Accords benefit the Red Chinese economy over ours. The U.S. would have to spend a ton of money immediately, while Red China could increase its emissions each year for 13 years. Chinese leaders expect other nations to trust its pledge to cut emissions while flagrantly defying international sea law to aggrandize its land grab in the South China Sea. India made its participation contingent on receiving billions in foreign aid from 1st World countries. It made no concrete commitment, pledging only to make progress on efficiency, at half the rate it had progressed recently. Indian planned coal-plant construction is incompatible with its own targets. Pakistan wowed the world by offering to reduce its emissions only after reaching peak levels. Only 3 European countries have followed their Paris commitments, and one, Germany, has seen 2 years of emissions increases. The Philippines has renounced its commitment. The Accords are a sham, designed to shame the U.S. into crippling our own economy for the benefit of others. Trump accurately states the latest climate science by noting that extreme weather is not worsening. The U.S. has suffered no Category 3 or larger hurricane in our mainland since 2005. F3 or larger tornadoes have declined since the 1970s. Sea level rise rates have steadied. The Accords are an expensive agreement, costing nations between $1 trillion and $2 trillion yearly. It would cost $16.5 trillion for the world to meet its collective objectives. The world burns about 8 billion tons of coal annually. The U.S. burns less than 1 billion per year, less than 1/8 of the world consumption. Red China burns 4 billion tons annually. In 2015, 4 renewable fuels constituted less than 8% of total U.S. energy consumption. They cannot expand sufficiently to replace fossil fuels, nuclear, and hydropower dismissed by liberals. The non-binding Paris Accords activists could use to press American laws like the Clean Air Act to force the EPA to issue new, burdensome regulations. Leftist radicals could use Section 115 reporting requirements to file a lawsuit against the EPA, compelling action to divulge how we meet global warming targets. Most of recent EPA rulemaking has occurred not through administrative procedure action but through consent decrees and third parties suing the EPA to compel liberal action. Regulation by litigation is an abuse of authority and of the rulemaking process. Trump seeks to mitigate and eliminate exposure to such legal targets set by Obama. The Obama climate action plan incorporated the Accords as a political strategy by which he would give his legally dubious climate policies treaty status without using the constitutional treaty process. He set his climate agenda regardless of preferences of future presidents, congresses, and voters. His adopted policies would have achieved only 51% of the established U.S. goal. European countries that have implemented the Accords have seen higher electricity rates already. Leftists portray the U.S. as a major global polluter, yet we are among the cleanest countries, enjoying much cleaner air than Germany, Italy, the UK, Austria, France, and Japan. WHO measures particles that cause many diseases and most deaths by air pollution, e.g., COPD, heart disease, strokes, and lung cancer. For both urban and rural populations, the U.S. is one of the most pollution-free countries worldwide. Liberals whine that the U.S. suffers horrid pollution from carbon dioxide, but CO2 is not a pollutant and is non-toxic. It does not harm humans. Plants need it to live and grow. Growers pump CO2 into their greenhouses, to 3 times that in the natural environment, to grow stronger, healthier plants. Actually, present levels of CO2 concentration in our environment are much lower than during earlier periods in the planet history. U.S. CO2 emissions have dropped by 12% since 2006, mostly because of the development of liquefied natural gas.

TAKE ACTION NOW. Because of presidential leadership, American businesses are expanding and investing, creating jobs here instead of shipping them overseas. America is back! Polls show that Americans overwhelmingly reject global warming theories. Now, the U.S. can lead in promoting rational energy and environmental policies, protect U.S. jobs, and lower expensive regulation burdens. We can protect the environment while protecting economic competitiveness and promoting affordability and reliability. We must help the Trump Administration by pressing our Capitol Hill delegation to rein in, expose, and eliminate taxpayer funding for the UN climate regime. Contact your congressman and 2 senators today to support the decision by the President to exit the Paris Accords and other UN schemes and establish U.S. energy independence with reasonable pollution safeguards.

Research, documentation, and analysis for this issue paper done by Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom. This material copyrighted by Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom, with express prior permission granted for its use by other groups in the NE Conservative Coalition Network. 6-17 C.

Previous post:

Next post: