Mr. President, Tear up this treaty

At his April 29 Harrisburg, PA rally (starting at13:09) President Trump made one of his strongest statements yet on the Paris climate (non)treaty.

“Our government rushed to join international agreements where the United States pays the cost and bears the burdens, while other countries get the benefits and pay nothing,” the President said. “This includes deals like the one-sided Paris climate accord, where the United States pays billions of dollars, while China, Russia and India have contributed and will contribute nothing.

“On top of all of that, it’s estimated that full compliance with the agreement could ultimately shrink America’s GDP by $2.5 trillion dollars over a ten-year period. That means factories and plants closing all over our country. Not with me folks! I’ll be making a big decision on the Paris accord over the next two weeks, and we will see what happens.”

After months of White House and Administration discussions and battles over what to do about this anti-fossil fuel, anti-people, anti-US, wealth-redistributionist agreement, there is hope that President Trump will do what Candidate Trump had promised: Bring the United States back from the brink of disaster.

Colleagues and I have previously suggested two options that would quickly nullify what President Obama unilaterally tried to do during his final months in office, as well as any international justification for EPA and other regulations, such as the Clean Power Plan and social cost of carbon charade.

(1) Send the proposed Paris treaty to the US Senate, as required by the Constitution for any international agreement that significantly affects the United States and its citizens. This accord arguably affects us more than the vast majority of agreements that have indeed been treated as treaties and presented to the Senate under its advice and consent duties.

(2) Withdraw from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the grandfather of the Paris treaty. We are well beyond the period during which withdrawal was not permitted, and pulling out of the UNFCCC would terminate any US obligations under the convention, the Obama Paris treaty and all other climate-related agreements.

Here’s why we should do that – and why President Trump should stick to his newly rediscovered guns.

It is increasingly obvious from what has been happening in the USA, Europe, Canada, Australia and elsewhere that climate and renewable energy policies kill millions of jobs and send millions of families into green energy poverty. It is equally obvious that virtually all developing nations signed the Paris treaty solely to share in hundreds of billions of dollars in expected (and demanded) “climate change adaptation, mitigation and reparation” money – and because they are not obligated to reduce their fossil fuel use or greenhouse gas emissions.

That means the United States would be obligated to de-carbonize, de-industrialize, and reduce its growth, job creation and living standards – while sending hundreds of billions of dollars to ruling elites in developing countries that will continue emitting greenhouse gases.

And that means there will be no global climate or environmental benefits even if those gases have somehow replaced the powerful solar and other natural forces that have driven climate change throughout Earth and human history. Atmospheric greenhouse gases will continue to climb, even if the United States shuts down every home, factory, power plant, vehicle, hospital and other carbon-based fuel user.

(For those who still believe in greenhouse gas-driven climate change, we would even be ending our use of cheap, reliable natural gas – the fuel that has allowed the United States to be virtually the only nation in the world to have steadily reduced its CO2/GHG emissions the past five years.)

Rejecting Paris would make the United States a true global leader – by disavowing and walking away from a treaty that was signed by President Obama but, in violation of the Constitution, never presented to the Senate, despite the hugely harmful impacts it would have on this nation. It would also mean this new President, and this new United States would lead from the front, instead of from behind.

Finally, it would awaken the rest of the world and validate their own inclinations to send this ill-conceived, one-sided, destructive, anti-humanity treaty to the ash heap of history, where it belongs.

Categories

About the Author: Paul Driessen

Paul Driessen

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for CFACT and author of Cracking Big Green and Eco-Imperialism: Green Power - Black Death.

  • Mervyn

    I am praying Donald Trump does the right thing by withdrawing America from the Paris Agreement. Failing to do so what not just be a lost opportunity to bring an end to the greatest scientific deception, it would make Donald Trump a hypocrite and a fool because the Agreement is in contradiction to his policies (energy; economic; etc) and also to his election campaigning rhetoric, promises and commitments to voters.

  • jameshrust

    Great article. President Trump should follow this sage advice and save the U. S. billions of dollars per year wasted wining and dining U. N. bureaucrats used to dining at American taxpayer’s trough.

  • Sandra Holstein

    President Trump, please get us out!

  • MILES E DRAKE

    It was clear at last week’s “People’s Climate March”, as at the last communist-organized and -managed left-wing play date in 2014, that Green is the new Red, and that the marxist hoax of “global warming” is to be the pretext for the violent overthrow of the legitimately-elected President and the establishment of a one-party peoples republic. As with every lie, fraud and canard that the Obammunist coalition of satanists, socialists and sodomites has tried, the real people of America must stand firm and tell them to shove the warmist hoax up their a**es – if there’s room.

  • MarcJ

    There were 196
    heads of state meeting in Paris in 2015 talking about saving the planet from
    the ongoing Climate Change disaster (not a word about those Muslim terrorists
    murdering the infidels by the hundreds in the same city of Paris). That coming
    disaster was renamed as the Climate Change hoax after 20 consecutive years of
    GLOBAL COOLING from the previous Global Warming scam. Those government-paid
    drones ($25 billion per year of taxpayer funds) worked overtime to
    “recalculate” their computer equations and “recalibrate” their instruments to
    “demonstrate” retroactively how it was still getting hotter instead of
    colder. The chant of the coming irreversible Planet Earth demise was led by our
    Marxist Muslim President from Kenya – B. Hussein Obama – who among many other
    idiotic statements also declared that fighting the Climate Change is the best
    way to fight the ISIS Sunni terrorists. I feel sorry for the citizens of Paris and
    Nice and Berlin who are still having nightmares about the recent wave of
    jihadist mass murders there. To complete that tragi-comedy we just have to wait
    for the concluding speech by our Hussein shouting “Allahu akbar!” Of course –
    but only after bestowing several billion dollars to that socialist UN panel for
    their socialist propaganda.

    He refused to bomb
    ISIS oil fields and their oil-transporting trucks because of possible
    “environmental” damages. That ISIS oil then goes to the Turkish ports to be
    exported to the world markets; let us remember that Turkey is also ruled by the
    Sunni Muslim dictator Erdogan. The money earned this way then serves to buy more
    bombs for the ISIS terrorists – including those curved knives with which to cut
    Christian heads.

  • Murph68

    Mr. President, resist the pressure to follow the global progressives and their false narrative about climate change! Withdraw from this horrible Paris agreement.

  • Bob Young

    Based on the UN’s own faulty manufactured “science,” the Paris Accord will do nothing to avert their projected temperature increases. Therefore let’s get rid of the crap and cite its in effectiveness to solve their own manufactured problem.

  • Big Ed

    I like the idea that there are two ways to get away from this fiasco. I think he should do them both-submit the plan to the Senate for disapproval and withdraw from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Trump knows exactly what he is up against as I’ve heard him, more than once, refer to global warming as a hoax. The money involved runs to $2.5 trillion over the next ten years, which is an awfully big pile of dough for a hoax. Further, even folks who think global warming is real and is happening will agree that the $2.5 trillion will only reduce warming by 0.2 degrees C. After killing the agreement, kill all of the funding for anything remotely related to global warming. Then, move on to the next Obama hoax.

  • cc

    Since the Paris Agreement is not even a duly ratified treaty, it shouldn’t even be enforced at all. Just take the copy with 0bama’s signature and tear it up on Facebook Live

  • Dr Norman Page

    Climate is controlled by natural cycles. Earth is just past the 2004+/- peak of a millennial cycle and the current cooling trend will likely continue until the next Little Ice Age minimum at about 2650.See my Energy and Environment paper at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0958305X16686488
    and an earlier accessible blog version at http://climatesense-norpag.blogspot.com/2017/02/the-coming-cooling-usefully-accurate_17.html
    Here is the abstract for convenience :
    “ABSTRACT
    This paper argues that the methods used by the establishment climate science community are not fit for purpose and that a new forecasting paradigm should be adopted. Earth’s climate is the result of resonances and beats between various quasi-cyclic processes of varying wavelengths. It is not possible to forecast the future unless we have a good understanding of where the earth is in time in relation to the current phases of those different interacting natural quasi periodicities. Evidence is presented specifying the timing and amplitude of the natural 60+/- year and, more importantly, 1,000 year periodicities (observed emergent behaviors) that are so obvious in the temperature record. Data related to the solar climate driver is discussed and the solar cycle 22 low in the neutron count (high solar activity) in 1991 is identified as a solar activity millennial peak and correlated with the millennial peak -inversion point – in the RSS temperature trend in about 2004. The cyclic trends are projected forward and predict a probable general temperature decline in the coming decades and centuries. Estimates of the timing and amplitude of the coming cooling are made. If the real climate outcomes follow a trend which approaches the near term forecasts of this working hypothesis, the divergence between the IPCC forecasts and those projected by this paper will be so large by 2021 as to make the current, supposedly actionable, level of confidence in the IPCC forecasts untenable.”
    The paper was published in E&E on line at DOI: 10.1177/0958305X16686488

    See Fig 4 in the blog version linked above

    “The RSS cooling trend in Fig. 4 and the Hadcrut4gl cooling in Fig. 5 were truncated at 2015.3 and 2014.2, respectively, because it makes no sense to start or end the analysis of a time series in the middle of major ENSO events which create ephemeral deviations from the longer term trends. By the end of August 2016, the strong El Nino temperature anomaly had declined rapidly. The cooling trend is likely to be fully restored by the end of 2019.”

    For overview and forecast to 2100 see Fig 12

    Fig. 12. Comparative Temperature Forecasts to 2100.
    Fig. 12 compares the IPCC forecast with the Akasofu (31) forecast (red harmonic) and with the simple and most reasonable working hypothesis of this paper (green line) that the “Golden Spike” temperature peak at about 2004 is the most recent peak in the millennial cycle. Akasofu forecasts a further temperature increase to 2100 to be 0.5°C ± 0.2C, rather than 4.0 C +/- 2.0C predicted by the IPCC. but this interpretation ignores the Millennial inflexion point at 2004. Fig. 12 shows that the well documented 60-year temperature cycle coincidentally also peaks at about 2004.Looking at the shorter 60+/- year wavelength modulation of the millennial trend, the most straightforward hypothesis is that the cooling trends from 2004 forward will simply be a mirror image of the recent rising trends. This is illustrated by the green curve in Fig. 12, which shows cooling until 2038, slight warming to 2073 and then cooling to the end of the century, by which time almost all of the 20th century warming will have been reversed.

  • Sean Rickmin

    Get out of the paris treaty and out of the u.n.PERIOD.They both want to make AMERICA a third world country and their loudest voice is backdoor barry obama.

  • wally12

    Trump must not bend or give an inch in terms of the Paris Climate Agreement. First he must reject the agreement and follow it up with a house and senate bill to seal its demise. If there are republicans who will not support a signed rejection, list all their names to the public. I am positive that the majority of citizens will support Trump.

  • wally12

    Trump must not bend on this issue. A complete rejection of the Paris Climate agreement is a absolute must.

  • ONTIME

    We should withdraw from all these treaties in order for possible renegotiation to take place, the President is right, our willingness to take it in the shorts was a pathetic display of the laziest diplomacy this nation has experienced…The DNCommunist always sold us out and our economy has taken a real beating making it hard on Americans all around…I will be glad to see this frigging stupidity by jackass dems come to a end and real quality negotiation from our people come into play…..America for Americans and America 1st…..