[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 29, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2138-S2141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. RES. 551

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I am here with regard to a unanimous 
consent resolution.
  I have tried one before to pursue a simple truth that climate change 
is real. Earlier this year, I came to the floor and asked my colleagues 
if they could all agree on that simple scientific fact. Sadly, given 
the nature of this body, they could not.
  So we are going to break it down into smaller bits because the 
reality of climate change is made up of many, many simple truths; and I 
hope that by breaking it down piece by piece, I can find areas where my 
colleagues will agree.
  Today's simple truth: Sea levels are rising. Can we agree on that? 
The resolution specifically says: ``recognizing that sea levels are 
rising at accelerated rates due to human-caused climate change.''
  As global air temperatures rise, obviously, so do the temperatures of 
the oceans. Here is a graph showing the increase in ocean heat content. 
It is measured in zettajoules. ``Zettajoules'' is a very big number. 
``Zetta'' means it has 18 zeroes. It is a billion trillions or a 
trillion billions, depending on which way you want to go about it.
  To put it at a more practical scale, the entire production of energy 
by the human species on all of planet Earth adds up to one half of a 
zettajoule. The price we pay for the fossil fuel component of that half 
zettajoule of energy is an ocean whose temperature is increasing by 
around 15 zettajoules a year. It is a 30-times magnifier because of the 
effect of fossil fuel emissions.
  And as ocean heat content grows, seawater expands. The physical 
nature of seawater is to expand as it warms. And it also melts nearby 
glaciers, and both result in higher sea levels.
  Combined, glacier melt and thermal expansion of water cause global 
sea levels to rise, and the rates are accelerating over time.
  Here is the curve of global sea level rise. It is one of the most 
unambiguous indicators of what emissions are doing on our Earth to our 
natural systems.
  Sea level rise has been going at accelerated rates since about 1863, 
which lines up right with the dawn of the Industrial Revolution when 
greenhouse gas emissions began to rise as we burned coal, natural gas, 
and oil.
  Depending on the trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions, sea level 
rise in the United States could range between 2 and over 7 feet by the 
end of this century. That is a particularly dangerous proposition when 
you consider that 3.7 million Americans in the contiguous United States 
live on land less than 3.3 feet above high tide.
  And it doesn't come up like the bathtub; it comes up and is still 
subject to tide and storm, so it can be driven ashore at far higher 
levels than 2 feet or over 7 feet.
  Most of the impact will be in Florida, Louisiana, California, New 
York, and New Jersey. My home State of Rhode Island and my colleague 
Senator Markey's home State of Massachusetts will share that 
unfortunate experience.
  Sea level rise isn't just evidence of a change in climate; it has 
real consequences. Thirty percent of people living in the United States 
live in coastal areas which puts them at risk from rising seas, 
increased flooding, shoreline erosion, and storm hazards.
  And it is not just people at risk. Mr. President, $10 trillion in 
goods and services are produced in coastal areas of the United States.
  Rising sea level will not only cause what we call increased sunny day 
flooding, like when there is no rain to cause flooding; it is just tide 
and sea level rise, but it will also increase the amount of flooding 
from storms and from storm surges, and that will cost lives and money.
  Indeed, it is already disrupting insurance, mortgage, and real estate 
markets. I have spoken elsewhere about the meltdown in Florida in those 
markets. Florida was recently described as the biggest loser for real 
estate values of all the 50 States, and it relates back to this cascade 
from climate risk to insurance being unavailable or too expensive to 
afford, to mortgages being compromised, to property values taking a 
hit.
  There is some lessons we should learn from what has already happened. 
Mr. President, $8.1 billion of the $62 billion ascribed to Hurricane 
Sandy connects back to the rise in sea levels. Could have saved $8 
billion were the sea level rise not happening.
  Everywhere, high water levels that were once rare--1-in-100-year 
events are becoming 1-in-10- or 1-in-5-year events. Up to 13 million 
Americans will face displacement from sea level rise by 2100.
  That is assuming that all goes smoothly, but all doesn't always go 
smoothly. There are tipping points in life. My favorite example is a 
rowboat.
  If you put more and more weight in the rowboat, the water goes up and 
up the side of the boat. And there is not much change as the water goes 
up and up the side of the boat. But then you hit a tipping point where 
the water flows over the gunwale and into the boat. That is a big 
tipping point difference because suddenly it is not just more and more 
of the hull down in the water; it is the whole boat catastrophically 
falling, flooding, sinking to the bottom of the lake or the sea. So 
tipping points are to watch for.
  Most ice is found in polar regions with as little as 1.5-degrees 
celsius of warming. The Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets could 
be destabilized. That would be a major tipping point. Our Earth has 
already warmed 1.2 degrees celsius. So getting to 1.5 is not far away. 
And Greenland, for instance, is warming four times faster than the 
global average. So that puts us at the risk of the polar ice tipping 
point very soon.
  Sea levels are expected to rise by 20 to 25 feet. Not 2 feet to 7.2 
feet; 20 to 25 feet if the Greenland ice sheet melts and an additional 
10 to 17 feet if the West Antarctic ice sheet melts.
  The disintegration of either ice sheet would render major cities 
uninhabitable and completely destroy America's coastal communities.
  So here is the simple truth: sea level rise is real. It is happening. 
Fossil fuel-caused climate change is accelerating its effects. Indeed, 
it is already disrupting American lives, pocketbooks, and families.
  Mr. President, I will yield to Senator Markey from Massachusetts and 
return to make the actual unanimous consent request.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I thank the great Senator from Rhode 
Island, from the Ocean State. I represent the Bay State. We kind of 
have a relationship with the ocean in Rhode Island and in 
Massachusetts. That is why we are here.
  I rise today in support of Senator Whitehouse's resolution 
recognizing the grave threat of sea level rise due to human-caused 
climate change.
  After decades of fossil fuel companies polluting our planet, ocean 
and atmospheric temperatures are rising. Our glaciers and ice sheets 
are melting.
  Greenland's ice sheet is three times the size of Texas. And in some 
areas, the ice is 2 miles high. So just think of Greenland this way: 
1,000 miles long, 300 miles wide, and a block of ice on it--the world's 
biggest ice cube--2 miles high is on top of Greenland, and it is 
melting.
  So just think of a full glass of water: the Atlantic Ocean. Now, just 
drop the

[[Page S2139]]

biggest ice cube into an already full--an already full--glass of water. 
It just creates a flood no matter where you have done that.
  So in 2007, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi named me as the chair of the 
Climate Committee in the House of Representatives, she asked me: Where 
should we go?
  And I said: Well, our first visit should be to Greenland because it 
is the scene of the crime.
  So we went up there end of May and out about 50 miles deep into 
Greenland on top of the 2-mile high icecap, and there is already lakes 
that are forming because the Sun starts to melt it in May and June and 
July and August.
  What that water does on top of that 2-mile high ice cube is it starts 
to eddy out groove marks all the way down to the bottom of that 2-mile 
high ice cube. And then that water--that now warm water--starts to 
liquefy the bottom of that body of ice. And they measure on the Richter 
scale ice quakes inside of that big ice cube.
  And that is what is happening on the planet. Greenland is a perfect 
example. I am so glad that Senator Whitehouse raised it because it is 
the scene of the crime; and all along the East Coast, we are going to 
see absolutely catastrophic consequences if we don't stop it.
  I mean 2 miles--I am thinking 30 football fields high of just ice 
going straight up in the air--30 football fields. That is what this is. 
That ice and ice all around the world is running into the ocean faster 
and faster and causing seas to rise.
  The result has been sea level rise on a global scale. In the 20th 
century, sea levels rose nearly 9 inches over the 20th century. Now, as 
climate change speeds up, we are expected to see that amount of sea 
level rise from 2000 to 2030 as much as a foot--1 foot additionally--in 
just 30 years.
  The rate of rise is accelerating, and if we continue to emit 
greenhouse gases that warm up that ice, sea level just won't quit. It 
is going to get worse and worse and worse. And for coastal communities 
across the country like those in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, this 
rate of rise is very, very real. It means more frequent and severe 
flooding events, eroding beaches, worsening storm surge, catastrophic 
consequences.
  I mean, in the year 2000, there were three climate-related events 
that cost $1 billion worth of damage--three in 2000.
  Two years ago, 27 events occurred in our country that cost $1 billion 
worth of damage, and the total amount was $180 billion just out of 
those 27 events, much less all of the other climate-related damage that 
was being caused.
  It is getting worse and worse and worse, and it means billions of 
dollars in infrastructure damage, insurers raising premiums or exiting 
the insurance market for that part of the coastline altogether, and 
home values just keep dropping.
  Senator Whitehouse has talked about this over and over again, warning 
like a latter-day Cassandra of the coming danger of the impact it is 
going have upon the valuations of homes, and it means serious risk to 
human health, to livelihoods, and to lives.
  And in Massachusetts, from Winthrop to Chatham to Rockport, our 
communities are adapting. They are building seawalls, investing in 
flood modeling, raising homes, and restoring natural ecosystem 
barriers.
  But sea level rise is a particularly challenging crisis. Even if we 
stabilize emissions, scientists believe that our seas could continue 
rising for centuries. What we can control is the future rate of sea 
level rise through our actions right now.
  So the task is very clear for the Senate, for our country. We must 
immediately lower our emissions, invest in ocean science, and build 
resilient infrastructure to protect against the threat that is already 
built into the system.
  So knowing all of this, what are President Trump and his 
administration up to? Instead of lowering emissions, they are blocking 
and killing and delaying 28,000 megawatts of clean energy projects that 
would cut greenhouse gas emissions instead of tethering the country 
further to pollution and costly fossil fuels.
  Instead of investing in ocean science, President Trump is proposing 
to cut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration by more than 
a quarter, and that would slash the budget for the National Ocean 
Service, which coastal communities rely on for water level models, 
flood risk assessments, and weather forecasting. And it would eliminate 
the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research and laboratories like 
the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory that have been 
the backbone of coastal scientific research for decades.
  We need to understand our rising seas, not undermine science. Instead 
of investing in resilient infrastructure, Trump tried to eliminate 
FEMA's Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program last 
year which would have delivered $90 million just to Massachusetts 
alone.
  So let's be clear. These cuts will not save the government money. We 
are going to pay more on our energy bills. Not double, not triple, not 
10 times more because we are not building in the safeguards, but an 
infinity size more. It is penny-wise but pound-foolish.
  Prevention is preferable to cure. That is where we should be. We need 
to make sure that we send a message. The President and his 
administration do not care about coastal communities. They do not 
understand the seriousness of climate change. We have to reject these 
cuts to science. We have to protect clean energy investments. We have 
to have the backs of our climate and ocean scientists, and we must 
support our local governments and first responders on the frontlines of 
the climate crisis.
  This resolution--the Whitehouse resolution--affirms the facts on sea 
level rise. These facts are forecast and felt on our coasts, and I urge 
my colleagues to support Senator Whitehouse's resolution and pass this 
commonsense resolution.
  I yield back to my friend from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, to accommodate the distinguished 
Senator from Wisconsin, I will move the unanimous consent now and then 
the Ranking Member of the Commerce Committee will speak.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation be discharged from further consideration and the Senate 
now proceed to S. Res. 551; further, that the resolution be agreed to, 
the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be 
considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Wisconsin.
  Mr. JOHNSON. Reserving the right to object, I have got a smile on my 
face here. First of all, let me state that I am not a climate denier. I 
am just not a climate alarmist, like the Senators from Rhode Island and 
Massachusetts. So I am thinking of Chicken Little: ``The sky is 
falling.'' I am not sure how I am going to be able to sleep tonight.
  I always found it very interesting when the Senator from Rhode Island 
was the chairman of the Budget Committee and we held numerous hearings 
on climate change with some tenuous connection to the budget. Again, 
very similar, ``the sky is falling,'' whether it is on insurance or 
housing costs or whatever.
  During those hearings, I spoke about, probably a couple of times, and 
entered into the record the ``World Climate Declaration: There Is No 
Climate Emergency,'' signed by two Nobel Prize-winning physicists Dr. 
Ivan Yaeger and Dr. John Clauser, joined by about 25 other businesses, 
researchers, and scientists, and signed by a bunch of other people as 
well. It was a commonsense document.
  The Senator from Rhode Island was talking about simple truths. Well, 
again, the simple truth is there is no climate emergency. The climate 
has always changed. It always will. CO2 is plant food.
  More people die of extreme cold than of extreme heat. I mean, these 
are things that are brought out in these hearings, generally by the 
minority witnesses.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Would the Senator yield for a procedural question?
  Mr. JOHNSON. I suppose if it is procedural.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I yielded Senator Cantwell's time in order to 
convenience you, and I am interested in how long you are going to speak 
because--
  Mr. JOHNSON. I am almost done. Do you want me to just object?

[[Page S2140]]

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE.--you are now inconveniencing our other colleague 
Senator Cantwell.
  Mr. JOHNSON. Great. Listen, listen, I have barely spent any time 
here, OK.
  The bottom line is, in those hearings, I asked witnesses: How much 
have we spent combating climate change?
  Five to six trillion dollars.
  Our Energy Secretary puts the number at $10 trillion and calls it, 
correctly, the largest malinvestment in human history.
  This isn't some simple resolution. This is setting up trillions of 
dollars of malinvestment, up to $50 trillion in testimony.
  So, again, we can't afford this climate alarmism. We can't cave to 
the Chicken Littles of the Senate.
  So I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak in support 
of the Senator from Rhode Island's resolution, S. Res. 551, and applaud 
him for recognizing that sea level risings are accelerating the rates 
that we are seeing and driving measurable impact.
  So my colleague from the Midwest objecting to this is very disturbing 
because even our colleague from Maine and I--the Senator from Maine, 
Senator Collins--had gotten CBO to do two different reports over the 
last 8 or 9 years to say: How much is climate change costing the 
Federal Government and Federal taxpayers?
  The first study came back and said it is costing us billions of 
dollars, and the most recent one said it is costing us trillions of 
dollars.
  So, literally, you are costing taxpayers trillions of dollars because 
you don't want to adapt or mitigate those impacts. I can tell you that 
these are real-world impacts, and, certainly, when 45 percent of the 
U.S. economy is happening in coastal areas, that means those coastal 
economies can be impacted by rising sea levels, and that means that our 
economic output can be impacted. So we were trying to do something 
about that.
  So I want to thank Senator Whitehouse for his leadership on this 
important issue. He is out here, time and time again, talking about 
this, articulating the issues, actually traveling his State, traveling 
the country, being an articulate voice on why rising levels of our 
oceans are important, why ocean acidification is important, why 
protecting fisheries is important, why helping shellfish growers is.
  You know, we did some research, Senator Whitehouse, at the University 
of Washington. It was only a few hundred thousand dollars. But we had 
five generations of shellfish growers about to go out of business 
because of the fact that ocean acidification had changed the 
temperature in the water, and we could not figure out how to seed for 
those shellfish. And the science that was done at the University of 
Washington helped us come up with a new process and saved the day.
  But what is the next challenge going to be? So we need to strengthen 
our coastal resiliency in the face of this climate change.
  So I really also applaud our colleague Senator Markey, who is a 
member of the Commerce Committee, also from an ocean State, very 
dependent on an ocean economy for lots of different issues. He wants to 
make sure that we are applying the best science to protecting these 
economies.
  As I mentioned, a nonpartisan Government Accountability Office cost 
report found that climate change will cost taxpayers more than $1 
trillion by 2039.
  So I know the Presiding Officer knows all about what happens when 
FEMA and disasters happen and we need to help States. But just imagine 
that that bill is now going to be $1 trillion by 2039, and rising sea 
levels are going to be part of that cost.
  Washington, my State, is already seeing real-world impacts from this, 
particularly in sea level rise. Puget Sound levels are projected to 
rise 1.6 feet by 2050 and as much as 10 feet by 2100. And statewide, we 
are expecting to see 1 to 3 feet by the end of the century.
  So that does have an impact. And the kind of changes that we are 
talking about can have impacts specifically on infrastructure. Sea 
level rise will worsen coastal flooding. It will impact storm surge. It 
will likely--just for example, what does that mean? We have a highway 
system that runs right up and down our Puget Sound area that can be 
impacted at times.

  We have had a lot of erosion lately, now twice, right outside of 
Bellingham, and I-5 has been closed. OK, why is I-5 closing? Because we 
have had so much rain, we have had so much impact-changing environment 
that we basically have had to have I-5 shut twice just to clean up from 
the mudslides.
  Our Amtrak service, which runs all the way from California up to 
British Columbia, also has been impacted by huge slides after rain and 
after these swollen rivers.
  And the increased likelihood of ground instability during earthquakes 
also magnifies devastating events and threatens critical areas like 
roads, bridges, and fiberoptic cables in greater Seattle, which could 
all be underwater as early as 2030.
  So we just had a massive flood out in the Northwest, in December, and 
that impact was just unbelievable--one of the biggest. You know, thank 
God we had the information from NOAA. And thank God, what did we do?
  In King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties, we basically, over the last 
decade, planned for mitigation and adaptation. We built a canal system. 
We built a system that allowed us to take some of that water and create 
a flow of the massive amount of water that happened during that flood. 
And we were able to, literally--we lost one individual. That was it.
  We were so proud that we had made it through most of that, until one 
individual drove into a flooded area and, unfortunately, lost their 
life. We are very, very sorry for them and their family.
  But when we planned and did adaptation and mitigation, when we looked 
at culverts, when we looked at diking systems, when we looked at 
relieving the pressure, we were able to lessen the impact.
  So it is not unlikely that any of these floods or any of these rising 
water issues impact a major transportation system in our State, whether 
it is I-5, I-90, or Highway 2, or some of these other facilities.
  So we pay a lot of attention to this because we have got a lot of 
product going to the Pacific right through our State. And so if any of 
these infrastructure resources are closed, it is literally millions and 
millions and millions of dollars a day.
  So rising wastewater is also an issue. So treatment facilities around 
Puget Sound and Elliott Bay are increasingly vulnerable to flooding and 
overflow, threatening the release of bacteria, toxic chemicals, and 
other pollutants into our waterways and our drinking water. Those risks 
and costs only grow as the water rises.
  In the State of Washington alone, 2 million people live in areas 
susceptible to flooding, with $86 billion of infrastructure at risk. 
And that number continues to grow as sea levels rise.
  Nationally, 34 million Americans live in low-elevation areas at risk 
to sea level rise. That is literally 1 in 10 Americans. So why ignore 
it?
  All my colleague was trying to do is to say we should recognize this 
threat and start to work toward solutions.
  Sea level rise endangers one of the cornerstones of our State's 
heritage and economy, and that is salmon. We all in the Northwest want 
to make sure that rising sea levels do not impact our estuaries and our 
wetlands, but that is exactly what these rising sea levels are supposed 
to do, significantly reduce estuaries and wetlands by 2100. These areas 
are critical for juvenile salmon as they migrate to the ocean, as well 
as birds and important wildlife.
  Just this week, Isabella Breda at the Seattle Times wrote a piece 
about how the Chinook salmon--I think I have got to get this for the 
Senator from Rhode Island because it is a great story. It is on the 
front page of the Seattle Times. But it is literally about monitors in 
the river because we are trying to monitor these storms, because when 
we have--this is the area where, several years ago, we had a massive 
mudslide in Oso, which killed dozens and dozens of people, 
unfortunately.
  And so we know we can have major events, and we need to do better.
  So, basically, it is about how Chinook salmon in the Stillaguamish 
River are vulnerable to the flooding

[[Page S2141]]

that disrupts the riverbed sediments that are needed for spawning. So 
we are trying to understand this because it is kind of like a massive 
amount of flooding can just wash away the salmon beds. And in this 
river alone, Chinook populations are down to roughly 10 percent of 
their historic levels.
  So this is really important to us. As a State, we want salmon. We 
want to understand rising sea levels. We want to understand what 
flooding is going to do to create damage. When are those spawning 
grounds going to be lost, and when are Chinook survival rates going to 
continue to drop? We want to know.
  Many of the 29 federally recognized Tribes in my State have already 
been seeing the impacts of climate change and are already preparing for 
the worst. And I know some people may not know the geography of our 
country, but we are talking--OK, let's just say that we are talking way 
out on the Pacific coast. Tribes like the Hoh Indian Tribe, the 
Quinault Indian Tribe, the Quileute Tribe, and the Shoalwater Bay Tribe 
are all located along the Pacific coast, and the threat of sea level 
rise has forced them to take aggressive, unprecedented actions to move 
parts of their reservations to higher land. Some have had to plan for 
full-scale relocation of coastal villages to mitigate the increasing 
dire threat of floods due to sea level.
  Trust me, the Army Corps of Engineers is out there, practically on a 
monthly basis, trying to come up with a plan to mitigate the impacts of 
the Pacific on the Shoalwater Tribe.
  Others are working tirelessly to mitigate the cumulative effects of 
coastal erosion, including inland flooding and extreme weather events.
  For some of our coastal Tribes, the situation is incredibly dire. Not 
long ago, when I was visiting the Shoalwater in Tokeland, WA, many of 
the homes and government buildings that were there on the beach and the 
shoreline you could just tell were quickly eroding.
  And so this is about whether we give them a resolution. This 
resolution that we were talking about makes clear that we cannot bury 
our heads in the sand while climate change and sea level rise put 
billions of dollars of infrastructure and millions of Americans at 
risk.
  If we want to protect our economy and these communities, we need the 
data and the science to understand the problem. We need to take the 
necessary steps to protect our communities and our infrastructure and 
our economy.
  So I urge my colleagues to reconsider. I hope that we will have S. 
Res. 551 before us again. I hope that some of our colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle that represent coastal States will talk to our 
colleague from Wisconsin and encourage him to, instead, support this 
legislation.
  We have to do better planning. We have to do better adaptation and 
mitigation. We have to use better science. And we have to recognize 
that the impacts of rising sea levels in our oceans really, really do 
affect our economy.
  I am so proud of our fishing economy in the Northwest. I think we 
sometimes--the Senator from Massachusetts and I, you know, basically 
debate back and forth about best seafood and best aquaculture. And I 
know the Senator from Rhode Island also has a lot to brag about.
  But that number--45 percent of the economy being in coastal regions 
of the United States of America and us doing nothing to think about 
what is the adaptation and mitigation that we need to do is just 
wrongheaded. We need these. I don't even know if the Senator has got 
any data on this, but I would assume he has thought about this from a 
military perspective.
  I have got a lot of military bases in our State, and they are very 
close to water. What are they going to do when sea level rises? What do 
we have to do to mitigate and adapt so that those bases continue to be 
successful, particularly at a moment when the Pacific is becoming even 
more interesting?
  So, again, I thank the Senator from Rhode Island for helping lead 
this charge every night but particularly tonight.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I would wrap things up this evening by 
simply pointing out that the views expressed by the Senator from 
Wisconsin related to climate change are not shared by the University of 
Wisconsin, which actually teaches climate science. It has programs in 
the Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences Department. It has programs in the 
Environmental Sciences Department.
  Courses include Climate and Climate Change; Climate Change, Human and 
Planetary Health; Climatic Environments of the Past; Climate Change 
Ecology; Ice and Climate Dynamics; Soils and Climate Change; Climate 
Change and Health Disparities; Climate Change Medicine; Agricultural 
Weather and Climate; Climate Change Economics and Policy; Climate 
Change Action Planning; Case Studies Exploring Infrastructure 
Sustainability and Climate Change; Climate Change Governance; Climate 
Change, Sustainability, and Education; and for the lawyers in the room, 
even a law class: Climate Change, Human Rights, and the Environment.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________