[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 112 (Friday, August 1, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1608]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      KEEPING AMERICA COMPETITIVE

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JOE KNOLLENBERG

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 31, 1997

  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution 
expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that America not 
be placed at a competitive disadvantage during the climate change 
negotiations in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997.
  The Clinton-Gore-Browner administration is notorious for pushing 
forward far-reaching environmental initiatives without adequately 
consulting the legislative branch or the scientific community. As you 
may remember, on September 19, 1996, President Clinton declared 1.7 
million acres of Utah wilderness as a national monument without the 
endorsement of a single elected official from Utah, let alone any 
legislative action by the U.S. Congress. More recently, the Clinton 
administration announced radically expensive air quality standards for 
ozone and the fine particulate matter without any causal proof of their 
risk to health.
  Now it appears that the Clinton administration once again is trying 
to pull a political end-run. This December, it will represent the 
United States at an international meeting in Kyoto to discuss revisions 
to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The 
essence of the meeting is to discuss new compliance mandates to limit 
and/or reduce the global emission of greenhouse gases.
  While the greenhouse effect as a concept has been generally accepted 
as scientific fact, there are widely varying estimates of humankind's 
impact on the temperature of the Earth's atmosphere. Therefore, it is 
impossible to judge what impact, if any, efforts to curb greenhouse gas 
emissions will have on global warming.
  In keeping with this uncertainty, the United States signed the United 
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, which called on 
all industrialized nations to adopt policies and programs to limit 
greenhouse gas emissions on a voluntary basis by the year 2000. In 
April 1995, the industrialized nations agreed to the Berlin Mandate, 
which set December 1997 as a target date to establish legally binding 
commitments from industrialized nations on the emission of greenhouse 
gas while exempting 129 developing nations, including China, Mexico, 
India, Brazil, and South Korea, from its provisions.
  If taken to its logical conclusion, the Berlin Mandate would create a 
two-tiered environmental obligation, forcing the entire burden to 
reduce greenhouse emissions on industrialized nations while turning the 
developing world into a pollution enterprise zone. This would truly 
create a ``giant sucking sound'' of jobs leaving America to the Third 
World.
  It's not too late for the Clinton administration to alter its 
potentially disastrous policy course. My resolution would express the 
sense of the House that:
  1. The administration will not sign any protocol or agreement to 
limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions unless the protocol or 
agreement also mandates developing countries to limit or reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions within the same period.
  2. The United States will not sign any protocol or agreement 
regarding global climate change that would result in serious harm to 
the economy of the United States.
  3. Any protocol or agreement which must be sent to the Senate for 
advice and consent for ratification should:
  (a) Be accompanied by a detailed explanation of any legislation or 
regulatory actions that would be required to implement the protocol or 
agreement; and
  (b) Be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and 
other impacts on the economy of the United States that would be 
incurred by implementation of the protocol or agreement.
  Last week, the other body passed a nearly identical resolution on a 
vote of 95 to 0. The House should express its will as well, since we 
would have to consider and pass legislation to remain in compliance 
with any such treaty.
  As the Kyoto Conference draws near, thousands of American jobs are on 
the chopping block. Any over-reaching and/or inequitable effort to 
limit the level of CO2 emissions would be tantamount to pink 
slips to the American worker. We cannot allow this to happen.
  I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this resolution.

                          ____________________