By Steve Hunley


President Donald Trump was looking out for the United States by taking us out of the Paris Climate Change Accord.  First of all, the agreement was not an “accord” in any sense; it was a treaty.  The reason it was referred to as an “accord” in this country is because then-President Barack Obama didn’t want to take the agreement to the United States Senate, which the Constitution requires to ratify or reject treaties.  Obama clearly thought it doubtful the Senate would approve the treaty, so he bound this country to it without following due process.

The mainstream media and leftists all across the country are gnashing their teeth and pulling out their hair, screaming as if it is the end of the world.  Why was the Paris Climate agreement a bad deal for the United States?  It was a bad deal because it is very costly in terms of dollars.  It was a terrible deal for the taxpayers.  It was a bad deal for each and every American who relies upon affordable energy.  By 2035, the Paris Climate Treaty would have destroyed $2.5 trillion in US gross domestic product; it would have caused the demise of thousands of jobs in this country, as well as severely damaged manufacturing interests in America.  Attempting to reach President Trump’s goal of achieving 3% in economic growth would have been virtually impossible with the Paris Climate Treaty in place.

Nor was the Paris Climate Treaty especially effective.  Even should every signatory to the treaty met its goals, which is highly doubtful when one considers China has been under-reporting its own emissions for years, there are still no repercussions should any country fail to meet its own pledge.  That means any changes in the temperature of the earth would be virtually undetectable.

Signatories to the Paris Climate Treaty were expected to pony up $100 billion, which was intended to constitute a fund for poorer countries.  This was the carrot used to get those same nations to sign the treaty.  Obama provided $1 billion of taxpayer money, without going to Congress to get it.  Nor are there any protections in the agreement to protect the taxpayer funds from corrupt regimes and dictatorships.  Comparing the environmental standards of the United States and China is like comparing a stallion to a cricket.  China has routinely falsified its consumption of coal and air monitoring data.

America is not bound in any way by pulling out of the Paris Climate Treaty from seeking alternative means of energy in the future, while President Obama entered this country in an agreement without the consent of Congress.  The treaty obligated this country  – – – for decades – – – to spend billions of dollars on international programs.  Obama had also said, “The private sector already chose a low-carbon future.”  If what Obama said was in fact true, what was the need for the government to clamp down?  Furthermore, MIT has verified President Trump’s statement that if the Paris Treaty was rigidly followed, it would have the effect of lowering the global climate by 0.2 degrees by the year 2100.

While insisting that America be bound to this treaty, many of the other countries signing the agreement made non-binding agreements.  Basically, they get a free ride and aren’t obligated to do a thing.  For instance, China was not obligated to reduce any emissions until 2030; India made no commitment on emissions at all, merely pledging to “make progress” on its energy efficiency.  Pakistan offered a pledge to “reduce its emissions after reaching peak levels to the extent possible.”  Germany has had two straight years where its own emissions have increased, while the Philippines has renounced its earlier commitment.

The President of the United States has a duty to take the course that serves the best interests of the American people.  Certainly Barack Obama and the left believe in globalism and advanced that particular agenda.  We should be proud we have a president who does what’s right for US.