Yeah, this is why President Trump said
“We will cease honoring all non-binding agreements”, and “we will stop contributing to the green climate fund”.
“I can not in good conscience support a deal that harms the United States”.
“The bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair to the United States”.
“This agreement is less about climate and more about other countries getting a financial advantage over the United States”.
The United States contributed $1 billion to the global Green Climate Fund, but the world’s top polluters contributed nothing, David Asman reported.
via Fox news here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“I Came I Saw I Left June 4, 2017 at 5:16 am
“For the US, it came into force 4 Nov 2016:”
Only as an excuse for the sitting president to direct funds to it through various mechanisms. That IMO is why the EU is so cheesed that Trump refused to sign it. If was already in force, why would the sitting president need to sign it?”
From this it appears the sitting president doesn’t need to sign it:
http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/Domestic_Processes_for_Joining_the_Paris_Agreement.pdf
US is category 1.
“1. Executive, either the President, Prime Minister, Cabinet
or Monarchy (Executive) (e.g., India). ”
“United States 1
Executive
The President directs foreign policy, engaging as appropriate representatives from relevant United
States government agencies, and negotiates, concludes, and signs international treaties and
agreements. United States law distinguishes among treaties, congressional-executive agreements,
and sole-executive agreements. Article II, Section 2, Clause Two of the US Constitution gives the
President power to make or enter into treaties with the “advice and consent of two-thirds of the
Senate.”18 Congressional-executive agreements go through the normal legislative process and
therefore require approval by the ordinary majorities in both houses of Congress before being sent
to the President for approval. Sole-executive agreements are those that can be entered into by the
President. All three classes are considered treaties for the purposes of international law.19 The US
has joined the Paris Agreement as a sole-executive agreement.20 “
This suggests US legally joined the Paris Accord, especially since it is not legally binding:
https://www.c2es.org/publications/legal-options-us-acceptance-new-climate-change-agreement
“The President would be on relatively firm legal ground accepting a new climate agreement with legal force, without submitting it to the Senate or Congress for approval, to the extent it is procedurally oriented, could be implemented on the basis of existing law, and is aimed at implementing or elaborating the UNFCCC”
“All three classes are considered treaties for the purposes of international law”
Per international law. I seriously doubt per US law.
“One graph to rule them all !!” ..LOL
My theory… was the “green fund” for the global south just another resource extraction scheme for Wall Street like the world bank and IMF? That might explain why we are the only ones paying for it: American imperialism.
This is a great example of how Fox News lies. At the same time that the US announced it would be contributing to the GCF, China in a joint news conference with the US announced it would pledge to make available ¥20 billion for setting up the China South-South Climate Cooperation Fund to support other developing countries to combat climate change, including to enhance their capacity to access GCF funds. Going forward and through these steps and other actions, the two sides were determined to work constructively and cooperatively together and along with all Parties to the UNFCCC to support developing countries to transition to green and low-carbon development and build climate resilience. China also is focused on fixing its own problems and will invest $360 billion in renewable technology by 2020. Per capita the US ranks 11th on the list of GCF contributors after Sweden, Luxembourg, Norway, Monaco, Brtiatin, France, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland, and Japan. Kudos to those countries that recognize helping poorer countries means greater stability. The war n Syria was precipitated by climate change when a massive drought forced many people from rural areas into cities to survive. To believe that instability elsewhere does not effect us is pretty naive.
This is irrational. A few days ago, Merkel’s meeting with China’s Prime Minister revealed great differences. A shoulder closure in climate issues fell due to “alleged” differences in economic and trade questions. The Paris agreement is as dead for china as for President Trump. Here, too, the conservative wing of Merkel’s party demanded a radical reversal of environmental policy in view of the minimal effects of all the actions taken so far and planned for the earth’s temperature. One should rather use the money to dampen the effects of warming economically and not damage Germany’s economy by overpriced CO2 reductions. The economy is already damaging: the nonsensical reduction of CO2 emissions in diesel and gasoline vehicles is fueling the output of NOx. Somewhere the O-atom must bind itself during the combustion process. If not at C, then at N.
It’s not about the climate; it’s about taking money from the US and giving it to everybody else.
Please, please, please Mr. President get our billion dollars back; the Paris Agreement was never ratified by the U. S. Senate; Congress never authorized the expenditure; the money will fund enemies of America.
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/why-did-china-pick-2030-oh-look/
http://jo.nova.s3.amazonaws.com/graph/country/china/wpp2010_poptot_prob_china.gif
Lets get this straight the United Suckers Of America were supposed to pay $3 Billion , double the amount of the next highest donor , and apparently of the approx. 200 countries in the world there appear to be only 15 that are “developed ” countries ? China free pass , Russia free pass and not because they aren’t 2 of the biggest polluters but because they just aren’t stupid enough to be played for suckers by globalists .
Funny if you still watch or read MSM the money never comes up .
It’s clearly not about the planet having a fever or even a sniffle it’s about setting up a self perpetuating global meddling bureaucracy and neither China , Russia or India are going to sit around and be lectured to by preachy globalists . Now if you want to throw some good old $ USD well great ,it helps pay for the all expense conferences to save the planet .
How in the world did the USA bureaucrats pull off the issuance of $ 1 billion in cash to the fund when it was never approved .
Are they going to try and pull the same stunt with President Trump ?
Count on it . The swamp runs deep . Start by firing everyone who facilitate that $billion dollar heist happen .
When I watch these Government Department Heads appear before elected officials surrounded by their politically correct support group it is clear the contempt they have for the elected officials and the
Constitution .
Clean house President Trump and the sooner the better .
Another graphic to go with the $: how many tons of pollution each country releases into the environment. That does NOT include CO2, as some trillion living things on this big ball happen to use as food.
I had not seen this:
https://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/Files/Barrasso_UNFCCC_4_18_16.pdf
Can we get a refund?
Can we ask for interest to be paid on considering it a loan?
Can we put Obama on trial? — Probably a big NO on that, given his seeming ability to get away with stealing.
Stupidity reigns supreme!
I would want a refund!