[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 152 (Wednesday, September 21, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Page S4884]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Treaty Document No. 117-1

  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to oppose the 
Kigali Amendment. That is the United Nations treaty that is under 
consideration in this body today.
  Two years ago, this body, the U.S. Senate, passed a bipartisan bill. 
The goal of the bill was to reduce hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, and do 
it domestically. We passed it. It was signed into law.
  Now, these HFCs are gases that are used in refrigerators, air-
conditioners, fire extinguishers, and in insulation. They also 
contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.
  So I worked in a bipartisan way to build a coalition of Senators to 
pass the bill. Two years later, here we are; the law is now in effect 
in the United States. Parts of the law are still being implemented. 
Yet, now, today, we are being asked to sign on to treaty obligations at 
the United Nations that I believe are wholly unnecessary.
  We have already passed bipartisan legislation to reduce HFC 
consumption, and it has already become the law of the land. Many of the 
benefits and the jobs that are being touted are U.S. innovations, and 
it is the result of our domestic legislation, not ratification of some 
U.N. treaty. We did it here. We did it right.
  I say we don't need to get entangled now in another United Nations 
treaty. Our own law can be amended if we would like. It can be 
repealed. It can be replaced. Depending on the impact and cost, the 
United States can make changes quickly. It is much harder, if not 
impossible, to do it with an international treaty. In fact, when you 
take a look at the Kigali treaty and amendment, there is actually no 
way to withdraw from it if we ratify and join in.
  When I take a look at this, it is especially bad because it doubles 
down on the practice of treating China--yes, China--as a developing 
country. And the key word here is ``developing.'' China is not a 
developing country, but this treaty says they are a developing country, 
and it makes a big difference in terms of the treaty and the way that 
China is treated internationally because it gives China special 
treatment.
  And I will tell you, Mr. President, they don't deserve the kind of 
treatment that they would get with this. Under this treaty, China would 
get an extra 10 years--an extra decade--to produce HFCs. Well, this 
places us, the United States, at a competitive disadvantage to China 
for 10 additional years.
  Interestingly and, I think, surprisingly to people when they hear 
this, the United States would also be expected to give more American 
taxpayer dollars to a U.N.--United Nations--multilateral fund that is 
set aside to help developing nations. The key word here again is 
``developing.'' And they want to treat China like a developing country. 
So it would send more U.S. dollars to China because they have access to 
this U.N. multilateral fund.
  Well, the United States is already the largest contributor to this 
fund. We have given over 1 billion of American taxpayer dollars to this 
United Nations so-called--it is a slush fund.
  But what about China? Do they contribute? Oh, no, China has actually 
taken $1.4 billion out of the fund that we have contributed to because 
we are a developed nation and China is still, theoretically and 
legally, by this treaty, developing.
  When you take a look at the debt that we have as a nation and you go 
and talk to any high school class or any junior high school class, as I 
have done in Wyoming--we did it in Wheatland, WY, with a bunch of 
really smart kids--they say: OK, when we have this debt, who are we 
borrowing the money from?
  Do you know what they say? Oh, we are borrowing it from China.
  So we borrow from China to give to the Multilateral Fund under this 
Montreal Protocol. And what happens then? The Fund gives it to China. 
The United States borrows from China. We give it to the United Nations. 
The United Nations gives it to China. So we are further in debt to 
China. This makes zero sense. Even to the high school kids it makes 
zero sense.
  With ratification of the Kigali Amendment to the U.N. treaty, more 
and more American taxpayer dollars will be going to communist China.
  Now, this is happening despite the fact that everyone knows that 
China is not a developing country and shouldn't be labeled as a 
developing country or be treated as a developing country. China is the 
second largest economy in the world. China is our greatest economic and 
geopolitical rival.
  The United States should not let China play by a special set of rules 
that is designed to give a helping hand to truly developing nations. 
China doesn't fit. But this is exactly what is outlined in the Kigali 
Amendment. And that is why I have filed at the desk an amendment to 
what is being discussed on the floor of the Senate today. My amendment 
says the United States will not ratify this treaty until China is 
defined, rightly, as a developed country--not a developing country but 
a developed country--because they truly are. No special treatment for 
China, period. Everyone should stand up for that in this body, each and 
every Member.
  So Senators have some decisions to make: Are you going to vote to 
allow China to play by a whole different set of rules? Are we going to 
put America at a competitive disadvantage? Are we going to vote to 
continue to give American taxpayer dollars to China?
  Now, Members and my colleagues and friends on the other side of the 
aisle say: Oh, it is not about China. This is about HFC, the chemicals 
involved. Again, we have already passed bipartisan legislation to 
reduce HFCs. The law is still going into effect. There is no excuse for 
any Senator to give China a handout at the expense of the American 
taxpayers and the American hard-working families--no excuse whatsoever.
  We should not be outsourcing our environmental policy. I urge my 
colleagues to support my amendment and, once again, say no special 
treatment for China.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.