[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 21]
[Senate]
[Pages 28501-28502]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  MONTREAL CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, one of the most important issues facing 
mankind is the problem of human-induced climate change. The broad 
consensus within the scientific community is that global warming has 
begun, is largely the result of human activity, and is accelerating.
  Global warming will result in more extreme weather, increased 
flooding and drought, disruption of agricultural and water systems, 
threats to human health and loss of sensitive species and ecosystems. 
We must take action now to minimize these effects, for the sake of our 
children, our grandchildren, and future generations.
  Over the last 2 weeks, 189 countries met in Montreal to discuss the 
important issue of global climate change. These countries met in a 
spirit of cooperation and in hopes of agreeing on the next steps for 
reducing harmful emissions of greenhouse gases. These countries, 
including the United States, have all already agreed, under the United 
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to take steps to 
``prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate 
system.'' These past 2 weeks were a test of their resolve.
  Unfortunately the United States, led by the Bush administration 
delegation, attempted to slow, stall, and block the progress of these 
talks. This is unconscionable, given that the United States is the 
largest single emitter of greenhouse gases. Fortunately the U.S. 
negotiators' efforts were not completely successful, and an agreement 
was reached to have additional talks commencing next year. Although 
that is a small step and not nearly enough, it is vastly preferable to 
the outcome this administration wanted, which amounts to no action at 
all.
  In advance of the Montreal meetings, I joined with 23 other Senators 
in sending a letter to President Bush, reminding the administration of 
its legal obligation to participate in the Montreal talks. 
Unfortunately, but perhaps not surprisingly, the administration 
disregarded this obligation.
  A decision to block further discussions on missions reduction 
commitments cannot be viewed as consistent with the obligations of the 
United States under the treaty.
  While the U.S. has refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol despite the 
fact that 157 nations have become parties, actions to block those 
countries from moving forward with additional commitments under that 
Protocol is also inconsistent with the U.S. Framework Treaty 
obligations.
  In our letter to the President, we noted that just this year the 
Senate, by a vote of 53-44, approved a resolution calling for mandatory 
limits on greenhouse gases within the United States. We wrote this 
letter and distributed it to interested parties at the negotiations to 
ensure that other countries understand that not everyone in the United 
States agrees with the Bush plan for prolonged inaction.
  To this end, members of my staff traveled to Montreal and met with 
representatives and negotiators from other countries. They also met 
with public interest groups, business groups, and others interested in 
taking positive action on climate change. They witnessed firsthand how 
the Bush administration worked very hard to dissuade other countries 
from agreeing to even discuss further commitments. This is not the 
position that our Nation should be taking. We should be leading the way 
on climate change, not burying our head in the sand.
  From the outset, even before they left Washington, the 
administration's delegation insisted that any discussion of future 
commitments was ``a non-starter'' and that any discussion about future 
commitments prior to 2012, which marks the end of the first set of 
Kyoto commitments, was premature. They continued at the conference to 
make this point to all parties. And when the rest of the world decided 
to engage in actual negotiations about discussions of further 
commitments under both the Framework Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, 
the U.S. stated bluntly that such discussions were unacceptable and 
pointedly walked away from the negotiating table.
  The good news is that the rest of the world stayed at that table and 
talked throughout the night and into the next morning, reaching 
agreement on a set of decisions for further discussions. And when those 
decisions were brought into the light of day, and it became apparent 
that the United States would have to state its opposition publicly, 
before all 189 countries, the U.S. was forced to agree to return to the 
negotiating table and to allow talks to continue next year.
  This means that 157 countries have agreed to discuss additional 
commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, even without the U.S. as a party, 
and that 189 countries, including the U.S., have agreed to look at the 
issue of further steps under the Framework Convention. Despite 
arguments to the contrary, cooperative international agreements to 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions remain a reality, and slow, but 
significant, progress is taking place to strengthen those commitments.
  The overwhelming majority of Americans support taking some form of 
action on climate change. A recent poll by the Program on International 
Policy Attitudes, sponsored by the Center for International and 
Security Studies at the University of Maryland, found that 86 percent 
of Americans think that President Bush should act to limit greenhouse 
gases in the U.S. if the G8 countries are willing to act to reduce such 
gases. All the G8 countries except the U.S. are signatories to the 
Kyoto treaty and therefore have already committed to such action.
  In addition, the study found that 73 percent of Americans believe 
that the U.S. should participate in the Kyoto treaty. Finally, the 
study found that 83 percent of Americans favor ``legislation requiring 
large companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 2000 levels by 
2010 and to 1990 levels by 2020.'' Thus, in one way or another, more 
than 80 percent of Americans favor taking real action on climate 
change. The current administration is completely out of step with the 
American public on this issue.
  States, regions and even localities are taking on climate change 
related commitments. Nine Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic States are 
working together through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, RGGI, 
to develop a cap-and-trade system for carbon dioxide, CO2, 
emissions from power plants. On June 1, 2005, California Governor 
Arnold Schwarzenegger signed an executive order setting greenhouse gas 
emissions targets for the State. The order directs State officials to 
develop plans that would reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions 
to 2000 emissions levels by 2010 and 1990 levels by 2020. The U.S. 
Conference of Mayors adopted an agreement, sponsored by Seattle Mayor 
Greg Nickels, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to levels that mirror 
the Kyoto Protocol limits. California has also adopted a greenhouse gas 
emission standard for automobiles, and a number of States, including 
Vermont, have followed suit and adopted the same standards. These 
actions confirm that there is widespread political desire and 
motivation to take action within the United States to reduce greenhouse 
gas emissions.
  I have sponsored legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from 
powerplants, which are a large source of carbon dioxide, a principal 
greenhouse gas. My bill, S. 150, the Clean Power Act, would reduce 
greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2010. This would be a very 
important first step by the United States towards combating global 
warming that would show the rest of the world that we are serious about 
doing our part. Congress needs to act to provide a mandate and 
undisputed authority to this and future administration negotiators.
  I am both discouraged and heartened by the outcome of the talks in 
Montreal. Those of us who care about stopping climate change did 
everything we

[[Page 28502]]

could to help aid these talks, and despite the Bush administration 
resistance, the international dialogue on climate change will continue.
  But a dialogue is not nearly enough, and the consequences of 
additional delay are dire. The U.S. has been and remains the largest 
emitter of greenhouse gases. It has a responsibility to its own people 
and to the people of the world to be a leader on this issue. Thus far, 
it has been anything but a leader and these talks highlighted that 
fact.
  I look forward to the day when I can once again be proud of the 
United States role in these talks, when we can enter these negotiations 
having done our part. I believe that is what we agreed to in 1992, when 
the Senate ratified the climate treaty and it is high time we live up 
to our obligation.

                          ____________________