By Robert Bradley Jr.
“Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund which is costing the United States a vast fortune.” – President Trump, below
President Joe Biden should immediately announce that the U.S. plans to withdraw from the United Nations Paris Climate Accord. Just put it in his teleprompter someone, and it will happen. But short of this, a new President should withdraw from the Treaty–again.
On June 1, 2017, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would exit from the Paris Climate Accord. Formal withdrawal began on November 4, 2019, with notification to the UN. Effective one year later, the withdrawal was reversed by the Biden Administration on his first day in office, January 20, 2021.
The reasons for a US withdrawal were given seven years ago this month by President Trump. The logic holds with ever more reason.
THE PRESIDENT: One by one, we are keeping the promises I made to the American people during my campaign for President …. I am fighting every day for the great people of this country. Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord — but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers. So we’re getting out. But we will start to negotiate, and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.
As President, I can put no other consideration before the wellbeing of American citizens. The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers — who I love — and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production.
Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country. This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund which is costing the United States a vast fortune.
Compliance with the terms of the Paris Accord and the onerous energy restrictions it has placed on the United States could cost America as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025 according to the National Economic Research Associates. This includes 440,000 fewer manufacturing jobs — not what we need — believe me, this is not what we need — including automobile jobs, and the further decimation of vital American industries on which countless communities rely. They rely for so much, and we would be giving them so little.
According to this same study, by 2040, compliance with the commitments put into place by the previous administration would cut production for the following sectors: paper down 12 percent; cement down 23 percent; iron and steel down 38 percent; coal — and I happen to love the coal miners — down 86 percent; natural gas down 31 percent. The cost to the economy at this time would be close to $3 trillion in lost GDP and 6.5 million industrial jobs, while households would have $7,000 less income and, in many cases, much worse than that.
Not only does this deal subject our citizens to harsh economic restrictions, it fails to live up to our environmental ideals. As someone who cares deeply about the environment, which I do, I cannot in good conscience support a deal that punishes the United States — which is what it does -– the world’s leader in environmental protection, while imposing no meaningful obligations on the world’s leading polluters.
For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years — 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries. There are many other examples. But the bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair, at the highest level, to the United States.
Further, while the current agreement effectively blocks the development of clean coal in America — which it does, and the mines are starting to open up. We’re having a big opening in two weeks. Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, so many places. A big opening of a brand-new mine. It’s unheard of. For many, many years, that hasn’t happened. They asked me if I’d go. I’m going to try.
China will be allowed to build hundreds of additional coal plants. So we can’t build the plants, but they can, according to this agreement. India will be allowed to double its coal production by 2020. Think of it: India can double their coal production. We’re supposed to get rid of ours. Even Europe is allowed to continue construction of coal plants. In short, the agreement doesn’t eliminate coal jobs, it just transfers those jobs out of America and the United States, and ships them to foreign countries.
This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States. The rest of the world applauded when we signed the Paris Agreement — they went wild; they were so happy — for the simple reason that it put our country, the United States of America, which we all love, at a very, very big economic disadvantage. A cynic would say the obvious reason for economic competitors and their wish to see us remain in the agreement is so that we continue to suffer this self-inflicted major economic wound. We would find it very hard to compete with other countries from other parts of the world.
We have among the most abundant energy reserves on the planet, sufficient to lift millions of America’s poorest workers out of poverty. Yet, under this agreement, we are effectively putting these reserves under lock and key, taking away the great wealth of our nation — it’s great wealth, it’s phenomenal wealth; not so long ago, we had no idea we had such wealth — and leaving millions and millions of families trapped in poverty and joblessness.
The agreement is a massive redistribution of United States wealth to other countries. At 1 percent growth, renewable sources of energy can meet some of our domestic demand, but at 3 or 4 percent growth, which I expect, we need all forms of available American energy, or our country will be at grave risk of brownouts and blackouts, our businesses will come to a halt in many cases, and the American family will suffer the consequences in the form of lost jobs and a very diminished quality of life.
Even if the Paris Agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it would only produce a two-tenths of one degree — think of that; this much — Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100. Tiny, tiny amount. In fact, 14 days of carbon emissions from China alone would wipe out the gains from America — and this is an incredible statistic — would totally wipe out the gains from America’s expected reductions in the year 2030, after we have had to spend billions and billions of dollars, lost jobs, closed factories, and suffered much higher energy costs for our businesses and for our homes.
As the Wall Street Journal wrote this morning: “The reality is that withdrawing is in America’s economic interest and won’t matter much to the climate.” The United States, under the Trump administration, will continue to be the cleanest and most environmentally friendly country on Earth. We’ll be the cleanest. We’re going to have the cleanest air. We’re going to have the cleanest water. We will be environmentally friendly, but we’re not going to put our businesses out of work and we’re not going to lose our jobs. We’re going to grow; we’re going to grow rapidly.
And I think you just read — it just came out minutes ago, the small business report — small businesses as of just now are booming, hiring people. One of the best reports they’ve seen in many years.
I’m willing to immediately work with Democratic leaders to either negotiate our way back into Paris, under the terms that are fair to the United States and its workers, or to negotiate a new deal that protects our country and its taxpayers.
So if the obstructionists want to get together with me, let’s make them non-obstructionists. We will all sit down, and we will get back into the deal. And we’ll make it good, and we won’t be closing up our factories, and we won’t be losing our jobs. And we’ll sit down with the Democrats and all of the people that represent either the Paris Accord or something that we can do that’s much better than the Paris Accord. And I think the people of our country will be thrilled, and I think then the people of the world will be thrilled. But until we do that, we’re out of the agreement.
I will work to ensure that America remains the world’s leader on environmental issues, but under a framework that is fair and where the burdens and responsibilities are equally shared among the many nations all around the world.
No responsible leader can put the workers — and the people — of their country at this debilitating and tremendous disadvantage. The fact that the Paris deal hamstrings the United States, while empowering some of the world’s top polluting countries, should dispel any doubt as to the real reason why foreign lobbyists wish to keep our magnificent country tied up and bound down by this agreement: It’s to give their country an economic edge over the United States. That’s not going to happen while I’m President. I’m sorry.
My job as President is to do everything within my power to give America a level playing field and to create the economic, regulatory and tax structures that make America the most prosperous and productive country on Earth, and with the highest standard of living and the highest standard of environmental protection….
The Paris Agreement handicaps the United States economy in order to win praise from the very foreign capitals and global activists that have long sought to gain wealth at our country’s expense. They don’t put America first. I do, and I always will.
The same nations asking us to stay in the agreement are the countries that have collectively cost America trillions of dollars through tough trade practices and, in many cases, lax contributions to our critical military alliance. You see what’s happening. It’s pretty obvious to those that want to keep an open mind.
At what point does America get demeaned? At what point do they start laughing at us as a country? We want fair treatment for its citizens, and we want fair treatment for our taxpayers. We don’t want other leaders and other countries laughing at us anymore. And they won’t be. They won’t be.
I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris. (Applause.) I promised I would exit or renegotiate any deal which fails to serve America’s interests. Many trade deals will soon be under renegotiation. Very rarely do we have a deal that works for this country, but they’ll soon be under renegotiation. The process has begun from day one. But now we’re down to business.
Beyond the severe energy restrictions inflicted by the Paris Accord, it includes yet another scheme to redistribute wealth out of the United States through the so-called Green Climate Fund — nice name — which calls for developed countries to send $100 billion to developing countries all on top of America’s existing and massive foreign aid payments. So we’re going to be paying billions and billions and billions of dollars, and we’re already way ahead of anybody else. Many of the other countries haven’t spent anything, and many of them will never pay one dime.
The Green Fund would likely obligate the United States to commit potentially tens of billions of dollars of which the United States has already handed over $1 billion — nobody else is even close; most of them haven’t even paid anything — including funds raided out of America’s budget for the war against terrorism. That’s where they came. Believe me, they didn’t come from me. They came just before I came into office. Not good. And not good the way they took the money.
In 2015, the United Nation’s departing top climate officials reportedly described the $100 billion per year as “peanuts,” and stated that “the $100 billion is the tail that wags the dog.” In 2015, the Green Climate Fund’s executive director reportedly stated that estimated funding needed would increase to $450 billion per year after 2020. And nobody even knows where the money is going to. Nobody has been able to say, where is it going to?
Of course, the world’s top polluters have no affirmative obligations under the Green Fund, which we terminated. America is $20 trillion in debt. Cash-strapped cities cannot hire enough police officers or fix vital infrastructure. Millions of our citizens are out of work. And yet, under the Paris Accord, billions of dollars that ought to be invested right here in America will be sent to the very countries that have taken our factories and our jobs away from us. So think of that.
There are serious legal and constitutional issues as well. Foreign leaders in Europe, Asia, and across the world should not have more to say with respect to the U.S. economy than our own citizens and their elected representatives. Thus, our withdrawal from the agreement represents a reassertion of America’s sovereignty. (Applause.) Our Constitution is unique among all the nations of the world, and it is my highest obligation and greatest honor to protect it. And I will.
Staying in the agreement could also pose serious obstacles for the United States as we begin the process of unlocking the restrictions on America’s abundant energy reserves, which we have started very strongly. It would once have been unthinkable that an international agreement could prevent the United States from conducting its own domestic economic affairs, but this is the new reality we face if we do not leave the agreement or if we do not negotiate a far better deal.
The risks grow as historically these agreements only tend to become more and more ambitious over time. In other words, the Paris framework is a starting point — as bad as it is — not an end point. And exiting the agreement protects the United States from future intrusions on the United States’ sovereignty and massive future legal liability. Believe me, we have massive legal liability if we stay in.
As President, I have one obligation, and that obligation is to the American people. The Paris Accord would undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our sovereignty, impose unacceptable legal risks, and put us at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the world. It is time to exit the Paris Accord — (applause) — and time to pursue a new deal that protects the environment, our companies, our citizens, and our country.
It is time to put Youngstown, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania — along with many, many other locations within our great country — before Paris, France. It is time to make America great again. Thank you very much.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I read Donald Trump’s manifesto before the 2016 presidential election, and found it very impressive. Even more impressive was the fact that he tried very hard to implement every part of it while president – including exiting the Paris agreement as above. Another Donald Trump term is going to be very interesting …..
The Paris agreement is NOT a treaty by the definition of the US constitution. Never voted on by the Senate.
I do not know why an “agreement” signed by one president cannot be immediately revoked by the next POTUS. Apparently Obama agreed to some sort of steps required to get out of the agreement, but HOW can he do that and how can TRUMP! be held to those steps. I think this time around TRUMP! will just get out without following any “rules” not affirmed by the US Senate. Let that play out in the courts and see if the current SCOTUS agrees with the one that said TRUMP!, the current president at the time did not have the authority to undue what Obama did by executive order. (this was regarding DACA and Obama’s use of “prosecutorial discretion”)
As true today as it was then. Next time Trump will ditch Paris on day one. And read the same speech except for the part of negotiating a better deal. Not needed. No deal is needed when there is no problem to solve.
O/T. The non war on the motorist
Sadiq Khan vows to issue 1million speeding fines to London drivers before the end of the year as Mayor’s war on motorists goes up a gear
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13518519/Sadiq-Khan-vows-plans-issue-1million-speeding-fines-London-drivers-end-year-Mayors-war-motorists-goes-gear.html
Speeding in London? Now, that is funny
Mostly 20mph limits…
Such clarity of intent and understanding. The media distorted everything he said and portrayed him as an ignorant bumpkin. Anybody not voting for him in November is making a mistake.
truinternationaldepressure
The Media always distort everything Trump says. Don’t believe their interpretation.
The only way to know what Trump really says/means is to hear it yourself, from his own mouth. You can’t depend on a leftwing reporter to give an accurate interpretation because of their in-built bias. They always portray Trump in the worst light possible. It’s their job.
Not just from his mouth, but you need to hear the entire statement, not just the snippets the press feels like showing.
I believe Trump erred in not sending the agreement to a vote in the Senate. It would be harder to implement aspects of the Paris agreement after it was defeated.
Good point, Soylent….
Fact of the matter is the Paris Accord is not a “real” treaty, but just a way to express good feelings about the Earth. No means of enforcement that I can find, but lottsa money to the warlords in small countries by the U.S. taxpayers. Glad we never treated the Paris Accord as a treaty, and even if we had done it, would not have been approved by the Senate.
And worse of all, we puny humans in the U.S. following all the “rules” could not change the “global temperature” by a hundreth of a degree (any scale you choose). The Chinese and Indians and lottsa folks that signed onto the accord do not seem to be making efforts that have had any effect, and they crank out more so-called greenhouse gases than the U.S.
Don’t know how many folks will understand and appreciate my opinion of the “accords” and COP stuff, “ya gotta look good in the shower”. Athletic team members will get it right away.
Gums sends…
There are more on deck.
WHO wants the us to commit 5% GNP to a slush fund and guarantee that the next pandemic, all US medicines and medical equipment needed to fight the pandemic be given to WHO for redistribution before a single American gets a shot. Of course we know which Americans will get shots. Biden agreed to this in principal, but it has not gone to Congress.
UN Sec.Gen. has a treaty scheduled for this fall that covers UN response to any global crisis. The essence is a group of reps from various countries would meet, declare the emergency, and establish a duration of effect. Once set, the UN Sec.Gen. becomes dictator and command each and every country to do his dictates. A point of interest is the Sec.Gen. can extend the timeframe of the crisis without consulting anyone, including the original committee. Biden agreed to this in principal, but it has not gone to Congress.
Trump certainly won’t agree to anything like that. He is not going to turn over control of U.S. policy to the United Nations.
They say a good lawyer never asks a question in court he / she doesn’t know the answer to. It was clear that ‘Kyoto’ would go down in flames, but that was before the Democrats were totally committed to the Left.
The next Climate Change Conference is scheduled for November 11,2024.
That’s six days after the presidential election on November 5.
That ought to be a real interesting conference if Trump wins election.
COP29 will be held in Baku, Azerbaijan
I hear Azerbaijan is promoting coal and oil. 🙂
The Climate Alarmists can’t see that all their plans are falling apart.
Yes, if Trump wins the United States should immediately withdraw from the Paris accord. It is non-binding on the United States because it was never ratified by the Senate as required for treaties. We are not legally obligated to observe it.
But more important than that, if Republicans can win a majority in both houses of Congress, they need to pass a law that no Federal funds can be expended either directly or indirectly to regulate carbon dioxide or methane. And to clearly state that the Environmental Protection Agency may not regulate either carbon dioxide or methane. They need to do this as a permanent fix in case the crazies regain control.
If the EU countries and the UK, Canada, and Australia and New Zealand want to jump off a cliff and destroy their countries, I see no reason that we should follow them.
Global warming caused by human emissions of carbon dioxide is junk science. It is the equivalent of a genteel form of astrology.
The Paris Accord is a toothless paper tiger. Since the year 2000, CO2 emissions from fossil fuels have declined by about 1 Gigatonne per year (Gt/yr) in both the European Union and the USA (primarily due to switching power generation from coal to natural gas, which has become plentiful due to fracking), but China’s CO2 emissions increased by over 7 Gt/yr over the same period.
Since the Paris Accord imposes limits on the USA and EU, but not on China, the Chinese are happy to sign the accord, which they view as assisted economic suicide for the West, to their advantage.
China is a military dictatorship, which has four times the population of the USA, over 3 times that of the European Union, and nuclear weapons. If China violates the terms of a climate treaty, the Europeans can yell and scream and tell the Chinese leaders that they’re bad boys, but what can really stop the Chinese from burning all the coal they can mine or buy?
If enough Americans make the right choice on November 5, the above speech should be repeated on or shortly after January 20, 2025.
Since Paris was never a treaty approved by the Senate, then the USA was never bound to any of it at all. (Including any fine print about what it takes to back out of it.)
It was just Obama’s misstep.
Put the treaty before the Senate so it can be voted down. Once that is done, the treaty is dead in the US, and the next Democrat president won’t be able to revive it.
The results of the recent EU election could be a strong indication that the US is not the only country to consider withdrawing from the Paris agreement. In fact, if the US and a few more countries go through with their withdrawal plans, their actions could set up a domino effect, and why not? Have emissions taken a big decline because of it? How about fossil fuel use? How much more efficient and dependable have renewables like wind and solar proved to be? Are consumers lining up to buy EVs, reducing their air travel and red meat consumption? Have any of the COP conferences produced extensive and effective climate-fighting initiatives? If any of the above is happening it’s only at an imperceptible scale or just as often, not at all. So why are countries continuing to pretend they’re taking climate action when they’re just going through the motions or doing even less than that?
We need to disassociate ourselves from the Paris Accord and the United Nations.