Press Releases

 

Entries in Climate Alarmism (100)

Saturday
May022015

Cooler Heads Digest 01 May 2015 

1 May 2015

Announcements

  • The Cooler Heads Coalition will host a Capitol Hill lunch briefing by Professor Ross McKitrick on “Ontario's Green Energy Act: Environmentally Useless and Economically Disastrous.”  The briefing will be held from 12 noon to 1:15 PM on Monday, 11th May, in 2325 Rayburn House Office Building.  McKitrick is Professor of Environmental Economics and Fellow in Sustainable Commerce at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada.  RSVP to attend the briefing to william.yeatman@cei.org.
  • The Heartland Institute’s Tenth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-10) will take place on Thursday, June 11 and Friday, June 12, 2015 at the Washington Court Hotel in Washington, DC. Learn more here.

In the News

Why Tesla’s Powerwall Is Just Another Toy for Rich Green People
Christopher Helman, Forbes, 1 May 2015

Clean Power Plan: Thoughts on Ripeness and Standing
Marlo Lewis, GlobalWarming.org, 30 April 2015

Energy Sustainability for the 21st Century
Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, 30 April 2015

How Big Money Impacts Environmental Policy
Kevin Mooney, Daily Signal, 29 April 2015

Out of Control IRS, Rewriting Laws
Christine Harbin Hanson, National Review Online, 29 April 2015

In Iowa, Fiorina Speaks the Truth about Ethanol
Jazz Shaw, Hot Air, 29 April 2015

Electricity for Africa
Matt Ridley, Rational Optimist, 28 April 2015

The Carbon Tax and Economists as Experts and Politicians
Benjamin Zycher, The American, 28 April 2015

When Is “the Law” Violated under the Constitution, Anyway?
Donald Devine, Library of Law and Liberty, 28 April 2015

Obama Clean Energy Loans Leave Taxpayers in a $2.2 Billion Hole
Stephan Dinan, Washington Times, 27 April 2015

Renewables: All Pain, Little Gain
Kenneth Green & Taylor Jackson, Vancouver Sun, 25 April 2015

News You Can Use
Harvard Study: Half of Young Americans Are Climate Skeptics

Only 45% of young adults aged 18-29 believe in anthropogenic global warming, according to data released this week by the Harvard Public Opinion Project. Remarkably, the age group that least agreed with the statement that global warming is a fact and caused by CO2 emissions was that of 18 to 20-year-olds. 

Inside the Beltway
Myron Ebell

Senator McConnell Confronts EPA Administrator McCarthy at Senate Hearing

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made the most of his chance to take on EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy directly when McCarthy testified before the Senate Interior-EPA Appropriations Subcommittee on 29th April.  Senator McConnell is a senior member of the full Appropriations Committee, but joined the Interior-EPA Subcommittee only this year in order to be in a better position to stop the EPA’s proposed Clean Air Act regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.  The regulations threaten to destroy the coal industry and to raise electric rates substantially in States that rely on inexpensive coal-fired power.  Kentucky is the third largest coal producer among the States and gets over 90% of its electricity from coal. 

Senate Appropriations Committee hearings are not televised, and the subcommittee hearing room is small, so I did not see the hearing, but press accounts suggest that their face-off was dramatic and antagonistic. Senator McConnell raised a potential new obstacle to implementing the so-called “Clean Power” Plan that would require state-wide emissions reductions from existing coal and natural gas power plants.  The EPA has urged States to comply by entering into multi-state and regional plans, such as the Northeast’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cap-and-trade scheme.  But McConnell noted that the Clean Air Act requires that any binding multi-state agreements must be approved by Congress.    According to ClimateWire (subscription required), McConnell said, “I can assure you that as long as I'm majority leader in the Senate, this body's not going to be signing off on backdoor energy taxes.”

Senator McConnell also took a shot at the Obama Administration’s efforts to negotiate a new UN climate agreement based on a commitment to reduce emissions that relies heavily on the EPA’s power plant rules: “The failure of Congress to sign off should signal to other countries that they should proceed with caution into the December 2015 climate talks in Paris.”

House and Senate Committees Pass Key Bills

The House Energy and Commerce Committee on 29th April marked up and passed the Ratepayer Protection Act.  H. R. 2042 would delay implementation of the EPA’s so-called “Clean Power” Plan until judicial review is completed and would allow Governors to opt out if they determine that the required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants would have adverse effects on electric rates or electric reliability.  Twenty-eight Republicans on the committee voted for the bill, and twenty-two Democrats voted against it.

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on 29th April marked up and passed the Secret Science Reform Act, S. 544. The bill would require the EPA to rely exclusively on publicly available scientific data in its rulemaking.  All eleven Republicans on the committee voted for the bill, and all nine Democrats voted against it.  The House passed a similar bill, H. R. 1030, by a 241-175 vote on 18th March.  Four House Democrats voted for the bill.

In other cheery news, Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Tex.) has introduced a bill, H. R. 2111, that would abolish part of the Environmental Protection Agency and dismember the rest of it. 

Across the States

Gov. Brown’s Climate Leadership
Marlo Lewis

California Governor Jerry Brown this week announced a plan to reduce the State’s greenhouse gas emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, AP reports. Brown’s proposal is far more aggressive than the State’s “Global Warming Solutions Act” (AB32), which aims to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. It is also more draconian than President Obama’s UN climate treaty pledge to reduce emissions 26%-28% below 2005 levels by 2030.

California already has the 4th most “dysfunctional” economy in the American Legislative Council’s annual ranking of State economic performance. Although Brown’s plan would have zero impact on global climate, it would accelerate the brain drain and shrinking tax base caused by the State’s current anti-growth tax and regulatory policies.

Oklahoma Moves against EPA Clean Power Plan
William Yeatman

Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin (R) this week signed an executive order that forbids state regulators from working on a compliance plan for EPA’s forthcoming “Clean Power Plan,” the Obama administration’s major climate rule that would upend the power industry. The order also directs Attorney General Scott Pruitt to issue his opinion on the rule’s legality after it is finalized this summer. The executive order appears to be stronger than legislation that has passed both chambers of the Oklahoma legislature, and which is now headed to Gov. Fallin’s office for gubernatorial approval. That bill, S.B. 676, would give the Attorney General Pruitt the authority to ensure that any state response to the “Clean Power” Plan complies with state and federal law.

Around the World

Heartland Briefings Bring Good News on Climate to Vatican
Marlo Lewis

On 28th April, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences hosted a workshop titled “Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity” to “raise awareness and build a consensus” among people of faith that human activity is causing catastrophic global warming. The program featured UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs, director of the UN Sustainable Development Network, among other doomsayers.

To balance the Vatican’s one-sided conference, the Heartland Institute assembled a team of scientists and policy experts who conducted briefings in Rome, open to all media and the public, on 27th and 28th April. They respectfully urged Pope Francis not to align Catholic social teaching with an “unscientific climate agenda” that could “cause the suffering and even death of billions of people.”

Explained Heartland Institute President Joe Bast: “We are bringing the Vatican a message of truth for all with open ears. The science is not settled, and global warming is not a crisis. The world’s poor will suffer horribly if reliable energy – the engine of prosperity and a better life – is made more expensive and less reliable by the decree of global planners.”

At the Vatican workshop, noted skeptic blogger Marc Morano of Climate Depot asked Ban Ki-moon whether he had a message for the Heartland team. A security guard came over and whispered in Morano’s ear: “You have to control yourself or you will be escorted out of here.”

A compilation of the extensive media coverage and commentary on the Heartland briefings is available at “Tell Pope Francis Global Warming Is Not a Crisis!”  

United States and Japan Miss Green Climate Fund Deadline
Myron Ebell

The United States and Japan missed the 30th April deadline to convert their pledges to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) into signed contractual obligations.  President Barack Obama last fall pledged that the U. S. government would provide $3 billion over the next four years to the GCF.  Japan pledged $1.5 billion. 

Other countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, France, Norway, and the Netherlands,  have signed agreements that set deadlines for when pledged grants will be paid.  These agreements now total nearly $4 billion of the $10.2 billion pledged.

There have been no indications that the U. S. Congress is going to agree to appropriate the money that the President pledged.  Ms. Hela Cheikhrouhou, the executive director of the GCF, told Reuters that turning the pledges into actual funds was “an essential ingredient of a successful agreement” at COP-21 in Paris in December.  That is because poorer developing countries are unlikely to undertake commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions unless those commitments are funded by the wealthier countries.

The real challenge will come in 2020 when the bill comes due for the deal that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama put together in December 2009 to keep COP-15 in Copenhagen from collapsing.  That deal centered around a promise from the developed countries that they would provide $100 billion annually in climate funds to developing countries beginning in 2020.  The fact that the GCF has so far only received commitments of $10 billion over several years is a clear indication that $100 billion a year is fantasy.  Hyperinflation is about the only thing that could make it possible.   

Science Update
Marlo Lewis

Warming Trend Declines in UAH Satellite Record

On April 28, Roy Spencer, John Christy, and William Braswell of the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) Earth System Science Center released Version 6 (V.6) of their global satellite temperature dataset. The scientists describe the upgrade, which took three years to complete, as “by far the most extensive revision of the procedures and computer code we have ever produced in over 25 years of global temperature monitoring.”

Compared to the previous UAH dataset (V5.6), the most important change is a reduction in the global average lower-troposphere temperature trend from +0.140°C/decade to +0.114°C/decade (Dec. ’78 through Mar. ’15).

The revision is significant in two main respects. First, the UAH dataset now closely matches the Remote Sensing System (RSS) dataset, an independent satellite monitoring program, which shows no net warming since Dec. 1996.

Second, a warming trend of +0.114°C/decade is roughly what scientists would expect from a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in a climate where positive and negative feedbacks exactly balance out. In other words, the updated UAH dataset is consistent with how the atmosphere should behave in a low-sensitivity climate.

Past is not always prologue, but if the trend in the revised UAH dataset holds, 21st-century warming should be limited to about one degree Celsius. At a minimum, the anemic warming of the past 36 years casts doubt on the big, scary warming projections popularized by the IPCC.

The Cooler Heads Digest is the weekly e-mail publication of the Cooler Heads Coalition. For the latest news and commentary, check out the Coalition’s website, www.GlobalWarming.org.

 

Thursday
Apr302015

ALG - Manning: 'It's not the weather, stupid, it's the economy'

6

April 29, 2015, Fairfax, Va.—Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning today issued the following statement on the poor first quarter GDP numbers in recent years

"It's not the weather, stupid, it's the economy. From 1996 to 2005, first quarter economic growth averaged 2.55 percent, whereas from 2006 to 2015, first quarter economic growth averaged just 0.03 percent. The common denominator here is not the weather, but the fact that the economy started to turn downward in the second half of the 2000s and still has not recovered. We didn't suddenly start having winters when the Great Recession occurred. Dispense with the bull market spin." 

To view online: http://getliberty.org/manning-its-not-the-weather-stupid-its-the-economy/

###

Americans for Limited Government is a non-partisan, nationwide network committed to advancing free market reforms, private property rights and core American liberties. For more information on ALG please visit our website at www.GetLiberty.org.

Saturday
Apr252015

Cooler Heads Digest 24 April 2015 

24 April 2015

Announcements

  • The Cooler Heads Coalition will host a Capitol Hill lunch briefing by Professor Ross McKitrick on “Ontario's Green Energy Act: Environmentally Useless and Economically Disastrous.”  The briefing will be held from 12 noon to 1:15 PM on Monday, 11th May, in 2325 Rayburn House Office Building.  McKitrick is Professor of Environmental Economics and Fellow in Sustainable Commerce at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada.  RSVP to attend the briefing to william.yeatman@cei.org. 
  • Former EPA official Alan Carlin’s excellent new book, Environmentalism Gone Mad, is now available.

In the News

Marlo Lewis on Ethanol
Jazz Shaw, Hot Air, 24 April 2015

Global Warming Pause Extends to 18 ½ Years
Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, 24 April 2015

Climate Skeptics Descend on Vatican
Heartland Institute, 24 April 2015

Introducing the Wind PTC Elimination Act of 2015
Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, 23 April 2015

Obama’s Climate Change Hypocrisy Highlights Lack of Faith
Washington Examiner, 23 April 2015

Report: Science Behind NY Fracking Ban Tainted by Money, Politics
Lachlan Markay, Washington Free Beacon, 23 April 2015

Clean Power Plan: Revisiting EPA’s Bogus Climate Benefit Estimates
Marlo Lewis, GlobalWarming.org, 22 April 2015

22 Ways To Think about the Climate Change Debate
Max Borders, The Freeman, 22 April 2015

The White House Is Lying about Climate Change and Health
Alan Caruba, Warning Signs, 22 April 2015

What Harvard Students Pushing Fossil Fuel Divestment Are Missing
Alex Belica & David Kreutzer, Daily Signal, 22 April 2015

Obama’s Global Warming Distraction
Ed Rogers, Washington Post, 20 April 2015

Return to Towel Mountain
Mark Steyn, Steyn Online, 18 April 2015

News You Can Use
EV’s Popularity Wanes

The auto-research group Edmunds.com this week reported that only “45 percent of this year’s hybrid and electric vehicle trade-ins have gone toward the purchase of another alternative fuel vehicle”while “22 percent of people who have traded in their hybrids and [electric vehicles] in 2015 bought a new SUV.” According to the website, this is the first time that loyalty rates for alt-fuel vehicles have fallen below 50 percent.

Inside the Beltway
Myron Ebell

EPA Administrator McCarthy Claims “Clean Power” Plan Will Boost Economy and Won’t Threaten Electric Reliability

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy really let them have it when she spoke to energy industry executives gathered at the annual IHS-CERA Week energy conference in Houston on 23rd April. McCarthy began by dismissing claims that the EPA’s so-called “Clean Power” Plan will be very costly:  

“First, I don’t think it’s accurate to look at compliance with the Clean Power Plan as a liability or cost. Here’s why: our rule creates a dynamic where cutting carbon pollution and investment decisions align. How am I so confident that this makes economic sense? Because you’re already making those investments. Our rule is not adding a line-item to your books, it’s informing one that’s already there.”

Later, McCarthy went on to claim that EPA regulations are good for the economy:

“No peer reviewed economic literature—no historical record—comes close to supporting the claims of massive job losses from reducing pollution. In EPA’s 45 year history, we’ve cut air pollution 70 percent while GDP has tripled. Environmental protection isn’t window dressing—it’s foundational to strong, lasting economic growth.”

This is a stunning non sequitur.  Nor does she mention that previous EPA pollution regulations were not designed to destroy major industries or take control of the energy economy. 

McCarthy then took on those who raise concerns that the new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants will threaten electric reliability:

“The second point I want to make is about reliability. Let me be clear: there is no scenario I will accept where reliability comes into question. Period. We can look at stringency, timing, phasing-in, glide path, and we can look at unit by unit reliability directly, too. The final 111(d) rule will give you the time and space you need to take a reliability-first approach that’s in line with your long-term planning, and gives you the latitude to adapt as market demands change.  Reliability is a high priority for all of us, so it’s good to have it front and center where it needs to be. But let’snot waste our time and energy worrying about scenarios that cannot and will not happen.”

This is an astonishing claim for the head of an agency that has no expertise in electric reliability to make.  My suggestion is that she and her colleagues at EPA might pay a little attention to what the North American Reliability Corporation is saying.  NERC released a report on its concerns with the “Clean Power” Plan’s first phase on 21st April.

AEI Holds Carbon Tax Love-In

The American Enterprise Institute on 22nd April (the 145th birthday of Lenin and 45th Earth Day) held a seminar on “Implementing a Carbon Tax: Practicalities and Prospects.”  A video of part of the event can be viewed here. The rest of the event can be viewed on the web site of a group promoting a carbon tax and headed by former Representative Bob (“Mr. 70-29”) Inglis (R-SC). 

Some of the presentations were based on a collection of essays that grew out of a conference AEI held in 2012.  That book has now been published by Routledge as “Implementing a Carbon Tax: Challenges and Debates.”  For those not lucky enough to have been given a copy at the AEI event, it can be purchased on Amazon for the discounted price of $48.09 …

For the rest of the post, click here.

Across the States
Marlo Lewis

House Bill Would Let States Opt Out of “Clean Power” Plan

The “Clean Power” Plan (CPP) will compel States to reorganize their electric power sectors to meet EPA-mandated carbon dioxide (CO2) emission-reduction targets or caps. The CPP is unlawful, usurps powers reserved by Congress to the States, will impose hundreds of billions of dollars in costs for illusory climate benefits, and raises significant constitutional and electric reliability concerns. What is Congress doing about it?

On Wednesday, April 22, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved the Ratepayer Protection Act by a vote of 17-12. As explained in the subcommittee’s press release and background memo, the bill extends CPP compliance deadlines until after judicial review is completed, and provides that a state would not be forced to implement a compliance plan if the governor finds it would have significant adverse effects on ratepayers or reliability. A full Energy and Commerce markup is scheduled for Wednesday, April 29.

Around the World
Myron Ebell

Paris in Peril (already)

Clare Foran reported in National Journal on 20th April that international climate negotiators have noticed that the Obama Administration’s INDC (or intended nationally-determined contribution) to the forthcoming Paris Accord is on shaky legal and political ground.  Foran’s story quotes Todd Stern, the State Department’s chief negotiator: “Certainly...countries want to get reassurance that the U.S. can deliver on what we've said that we're doing.  I wouldn't say it's a big drumbeat, but I have definitely been asked that.”

The largest reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in the U. S.’s INDC will come from the EPA’s proposed Clean Air Act rules for new and existing power plants.  Stern went on to re-assure reporters that “[W]e have a very solid basis for...having confidence in the power plant rule and other regulatory steps that we’ve taken.  These kinds of EPA regulations have been repeatedly challenged over time and almost always upheld.”

This suggests to me that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other Republicans in Congress are being heard internationally and need to step up their efforts to make it clear that the EPA’s rules will not survive in Congress even if they survive court challenges.         

The Cooler Heads Digest is the weekly e-mail publication of the Cooler Heads Coalition. For the latest news and commentary, check out the Coalition’s website, www.GlobalWarming.org.

Saturday
Apr182015

Cooler Heads Digest 17 April 2015 

17 April 2015

In the News

Al Gore: Poor People Don’t Need Coal
Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, 17 April 2015

Environmentalists’ Civil War
Robert Bryce, National Review, 17 April 2015

Five Hidden Ways You’re Paying To Subsidize Green Power
Brian Potts, Weekly Standard, 17 April 2015

Judith Curry vs. Climate Alarmism (Jon & Jerry—Are You Listening?)
Robert Bradley, Jr., Master Resource, 16 April 2015

Obama’s Illegal Coal Regulations Must Be Stopped
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey, Washington Examiner, 16 April 2015

Steyer Nonprofit Owns Stake in Green Energy Investment Firm
Lachlan Markay, Washington Free Beacon, 15 April 2015

Obama Administration Worries about Environmental Effect of Keystone Oil, Not Iranian Oil
David Kreutzer, The Daily Signal, 14 April 2015

German Backlash Grows against Coal Power Clampdown
Arthur Neslen, Guardian, 14 April 2015

Rebranding EPA’s Clean Air Agenda
Chris Horner, Washington Times, 13 April 2015

What’s the True Cost of Wind Power?
Randy Simmons, Newsweek, 11 April 2015

News You Can Use
“Clean Power” Plan Would Cost about 300,000 Jobs

According to a report by the American Action Forum, job losses from EPA’s “Clean Power” Plan could be as high as 296,000 through 2030.

Inside the Beltway
William Yeatman

Oral Arguments on Challenge to EPA’s "Clean Power" Plan

On Thursday morning, 16th April, I attended the oral arguments in the challenge brought by Ohio-based Murray Energy and 15 intervenor States to EPA’s “Clean Power” Plan before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The petitioners face a high bar to demonstrate they are properly before the court, because the “Clean Power” Plan is only a proposed rule, and the court has jurisdiction over only final agency rules. In fact, the court has never before overturned a proposed rule.

In making the case that the court has jurisdiction to judge their complaint, the petitioners invoke the All Writs Act, an 18th century statute that empowers federal courts to issue “necessary and appropriate” injunctions where “gaps” in a statutory scheme pervert the ends of justice. Courts very rarely have exercised their All Writs Act authority, which is reserved for extraordinary, unprovided-for cases. The challengers argue that EPA’s “Clean Power” Plan represents just such a case, for two reasons.

  • First, state regulators and utilities have no choice but to start complying with the proposed “Clean Power” Plan now, even though it’s only a proposed rule, because they are capital-intensive businesses that must plan years in advance. This has never before been the case with respect to any EPA proposal.
  • Second, EPA doesn’t have the authority to begin with. (For more on this complicated argument, see here and here).

Thus, they argue that an All Writs Act injunction is necessary to prevent States and utilities from having to continue to spend considerable resources planning for a proposed mandate that the EPA doesn’t have the power to issue in the first place. They are requesting an extraordinary writ for extraordinary circumstances.

At oral arguments, Judge Thomas Griffith seemed wary of the petitioner’s arguments, for fear of opening the floodgates to challenges of proposed rules. Judge Karen Henderson, on the other hand, seemed sympathetic to claims made by Murray Energy and the intervenor States.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s position seemed to be somewhere in-between those of his colleagues. However, he pursued a line of reasoning about the timing of the “Clean Power” Plan that suggested to me that he was leaning towards EPA’s position. During rebuttal arguments, Judge Kavanaugh noted that any decision by the court likely would be rendered during the summer, which is roughly the same time that the final “Clean Power” Plan is due. He then explained that challengers to the rule may seek an injunction to stay the “Clean Power” Plan immediately after the rule goes final. And if the regulation does indeed represent an extraordinary scenario, then the petitioners request would have a high probability of success. He concluded that such an alternative remedy (i.e., a stay of the final rule) would be available to opponents of the regulation only weeks after a decision was rendered on the Murray Energy case. His reasoning seemed to be: Why would the court adopt an extraordinary response (by siding with the petitioners), when it could wait a few weeks and achieve the same result through normal channels?

That said, prognosticating outcomes on the basis of oral arguments is a fool’s errand. We’ll find out what the judges actually think some time in the next three months.

Notable House Hearings

On April 14th, EPA Office of Air and Radiation chief Janet McCabe testified before a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on draft legislation that would allow States to “opt out” of the “Clean Power” Plan. She did not acquit herself well. For more, see:

On April 15th, the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee held a hearing on The President’s UN Climate Pledge–Scientifically Justified or a New Tax on Americans? In diplomatic lingo, the hearing focused on the administration’s “Intended Nationally-Determined Contribution” (INDC) for the December 2015 COP 21 climate conference in Paris. For a recap, see

Across the States
William Yeatman

EPA Proposes Unprecedented 55th Takeover of State Regulatory Program

EPA last week proposed to take over Arkansas’s Regional Haze program and thereby impose more than $1 billion in costs on five coal-fired power plants, in order to achieve an “improvement” in visibility that is imperceptible. This would be EPA’s 55th federal implementation plan imposed during the Obama administration. By contrast, EPA imposed 5 total FIPs during the previous three presidential administrations (i.e., Clinton, Bush I, and Bush II).

Around the World
Myron Ebell

Vatican Announces Climate Summit for April 28

The Vatican announced on 14th April that it will hold a one-day conference on 28th April on climate change and sustainable development titled, “Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity: The Moral Dimensions of Climate Change and Sustainable Development.”  Speakers will include Ban Ki-moon, Secretary General of the United Nations, and Jeffrey Sachs, Columbia University economics professor, director of Columbia’s Earth Institute, and director of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network.  Leading representatives of other major religions and prominent climate scientists will also be invited to speak. 

According to the Vatican’s press release, “the goal of this summit is to raise awareness and build a consensus that the values of sustainable development cohere with values of the leading religious traditions, with a special focus on the most vulnerable; to elevate the debate on the moral dimensions of protecting the environment in advance of the papal encyclical; and to help build a global movement across all religions for sustainable development and climate change throughout 2015 and beyond.” 

The press release continues: “The desired outcome is a joint statement on the moral and religious imperative of sustainable development, highlighting the intrinsic connection between respect for the environment and respect for people – especially the poor, the excluded, victims of human trafficking and modern slavery, children, and future generations.”

Pope Francis is scheduled to release an encyclical on climate change some time before he attends the second United Nations climate summit of world leaders in New York City in September.  The Pope will also address a joint session of Congress during his visit to the United States, where he is also expected to speak about climate change.

The Cooler Heads Digest is the weekly e-mail publication of the Cooler Heads Coalition. For the latest news and commentary, check out the Coalition’s website, www.GlobalWarming.org.

 

Wednesday
Apr152015

ALG - Tell Congress to stop Obama's stealth climate trade deal!

6

April 14, 2015

Dear Liberty Activist,

Click here to urge Congress to stop Obama's stealth climate trade deal!

 

Congress is considering giving President Barack Obama fast track trade authority to negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Fast track means that Congress would cede its right to amend the trade deal. Instead, it would be granted an up or down vote — even if it needed to be fixed.

At a time when the President has for all intents and purposes declared war on the constitutional separation of powers, it makes zero sense for Congress to voluntarily weaken its treaty ratification prerogatives. Why not make Obama go through the process under regular order, with amendments allowed?

Making matters worse, the U.S. Trade Representative website on the trade deal explicitly states, "Through the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the United States is negotiating for robust environment standards and commitments from member countries."

Meaning this is really just a stealth climate treaty — the outcome of which will be to allow Obama to unilaterally regulate the global economy. This cannot stand.

Obama should have to explain and where necessary defend every word in any treaty he agrees to, with it being held to the highest level of scrutiny.  That is Congress' job.  It is also their job to amend or defeat any treaty that falls short of being in America's interests.

You know what to do! Let's get on Rally Congress and urge both House and Senate members to oppose fast track trade authority for Obama!

Not giving the President trade promotion authority is not anti- trade.  In fact, the United States already exports $861 billion to the trans-Pacific trade partners, accounting for almost 40 percent of the $2.2 trillion of U.S. exports worldwide in 2012. As a result of this continued trade, our economic bonds with these nations are tight. 

Now it is time for Congress to step up and fight for the constitutional separation of powers and Congress' role in making treaties — not give more executive powers to Obama to negotiate a bad deal for the U.S. economy. Tell Congress Trans-Pacific trade deal will regulate climate. Don't cede treaty powers to Obama! No stealth climate treaties.

Let's keep fighting!