[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3217-3219]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             CLIMATE CHANGE

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I am back now for the 91st consecutive 
week the Senate has been in session to urge my colleagues to wake up 
and pay attention to the threat of climate change. I am delighted and 
proud to be joined today by my colleague and friend Senator Baldwin 
from Wisconsin to consider the effects of carbon pollution in her 
State.
  According to scientists at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 
weather stations around the State show that average temperatures in 
Wisconsin increased by about 1.1 degrees Fahrenheit between 1950 and 
2006. During the same period Wisconsin got wetter. Annual average 
precipitation increased by almost 3 inches. These changes are likely to 
continue and intensify as carbon pollution continues to pile up in the 
atmosphere. Researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison estimate 
that by midcentury the State could warm by 4 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit. 
By the end of the century the climate in Wisconsin may look more like 
that of present-day Missouri or Oklahoma, raising the possibility of a 
dramatic shift in the Wisconsin economy and way of life.
  This winter has been pretty cold in the Eastern United States and in 
Wisconsin. So was last year. Cold arctic air dipping down over North 
America drops the mercury. As we continue into a time of what has been 
called global weirding, scientists say that climate change may make 
these cold blasts more common as it alters patterns in the atmosphere. 
In a nutshell, on top of the long-term warming trend lies weather 
disorder. But the long-term warming trend is apparent. New research 
from UW-Madison's Professor Jonathan Martin shows that last year the 
so-called cold pool of frigid air that accumulates in the Northern 
Hemisphere each winter was the smallest since records began in the 
winter of 1948 to 1949. This year it is on track to be even smaller.
  Sadly, some of our colleagues just can't face up to the role that 
human activity--such as our carbon pollution from burning fossil fuel--
plays in the changes we are seeing around us. One colleague--indeed, 
the senior Senator from Wisconsin--is among this group. In January he 
voted against amendments to the Keystone XL bill stating that climate 
change is real and that humans contribute to it. Well, in 2013 the 
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel--his State's largest paper--noted that this 
type of denial was at odds with both Wisconsin opinion and Wisconsin 
scientific evidence. The senior Senator from Wisconsin, wrote the 
paper's editorial board, ``is just flat-out wrong.'' The paper went on 
to say, ``We elect politicians to make tough decisions and find 
solutions, not to shut their eyes and cover their ears, as Johnson 
repeatedly has done on this issue.'' The article continued: 
``[S]tubbornly denying the facts on climate change may be akin to 
denying the facts on evolution or whether the Earth is flat.''
  Professor John Kutzbach of the University of Wisconsin--an elected 
member of the National Academy of Sciences--was among a group of 
climate scientists who in 2011 wrote to us in Congress imploring us to 
take action on climate change. Here is what the letter said:

       Congress needs to understand that scientists have 
     concluded, based on a systematic review of all of the 
     evidence, that climate change caused by human activities 
     raises serious risks to our national and economic security 
     and our health both here and around the world. It is time for 
     Congress to move on to the policy debate.

  Well, I welcome that debate. Indeed, the chairman of the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources, Senator Murkowski, recently said on the 
floor of the Senate that she hopes we can ``get beyond the discussion 
as to whether or not climate change is real and talk about . . . what 
do we do.'' So where is that debate? Where are the other Republicans? 
Let's finally talk about the cost of action and the cost of inaction.
  The Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts was formed in 2007 
by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and the University of 
Wisconsin Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies. The scientists 
and public officials in this program are doing important work to help 
the State of Wisconsin understand and prepare for climate change. They 
are studying how it will affect wildlife, water resources, public 
health, and important Wisconsin industries such as forestry, 
agriculture, and shipping and tourism on the Great Lakes.
  Climate change threatens iconic aspects of the Wisconsin environment 
and economy. The Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts 
Agriculture Working Group reports that higher summer temperatures and 
increasing drought will create significant stress on livestock, even 
touching--dare I say it--Wisconsin's famed cheese industry. Victor 
Cabrera, an assistant professor in the University of Wisconsin-Madison 
Dairy Science Department--they have one--says heat stress

[[Page 3218]]

interferes with fertility and milk production. Dairy cows could give as 
much as 10 percent less milk. The U.S. Department of Agriculture 
predicts that by 2030 climate change will cost the U.S. dairy sector 
between $79 and $199 million a year in lost production. When opponents 
say reducing carbon pollution will cost too much, they conveniently 
leave out the cost of doing nothing, such as these costs.
  Well, the dairy State is not waiting for Congress to take action. The 
University of Wisconsin is leading a USDA-funded effort to identify 
dairy practices that minimize the emission of greenhouse gases and make 
dairies more resilient to the effects of a changing climate. Some 
Wisconsin dairy farmers are burning excess methane in enormous manure 
digesters--that is a frightening concept--to generate their own 
renewable electricity.
  Wisconsin sportsmen know that Wisconsin has more than 10,000 miles of 
trout streams--some of the best trout fishing in the country. Cold-
water fish, such as the brook trout, are there, but they are highly 
sensitive to temperature increases in streams. Under the worst cases 
analyzed by the researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and 
the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, ``brook trout are 
projected to be completely lost from Wisconsin's streams.'' Even the 
best-case scenarios see losses of as much as 44 percent of the 
brookies' current range by midcentury. Other cold-water species, such 
as the brown trout, are not much better off.
  Trout Unlimited--sportsmen and conservationists working to protect 
trout streams in the Driftless Area in southwest Wisconsin and parts of 
Minnesota, Illinois, and Iowa--did a 2009 study showing fishing in the 
Driftless Area adds over $1 billion per year to the surrounding 
economies.
  We have heard of loggers having trouble getting to the timber because 
the ground is thawed and too soggy to hold up logging equipment. For 
Wisconsin's loggers, the hard, frozen winter ground is what lets them 
move logging equipment. According to a study out of the University of 
Wisconsin, that period of frozen ground has decreased by 2 to 3 weeks 
since 1948, shortening the working window for loggers before their gear 
bogs down.
  And then there is the badger. The Upper Midwest and Great Lakes 
Landscape Conservation Cooperative even lists the great Wisconsin 
badger as one of the species at risk from regional climate change.
  Senator Baldwin knows that, done right, action on climate change 
saves Americans money, spurs American innovation, and creates new 
American industry and jobs. Focus on Energy, Wisconsin's statewide 
energy efficiency program, has been helping Wisconsin families and 
businesses save money and reduce energy use since 2001. The Wisconsin 
Public Service Commission expects this program to inject over $900 
million into the State's economy, and net over 6,000 new Wisconsin jobs 
over the next decade.
  I am very grateful to my friend Senator Baldwin for her strong 
leadership on behalf of the people of Wisconsin to stave off the worst 
effects of climate change in her home State.
  I yield to her now.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Whitehouse for his 
commitment to addressing the threats that climate change poses 
globally, to our country, and to our States. I thank him for 
highlighting some of those threats to my home State of Wisconsin.
  Let there be no doubt that global climate change is real. It is a 
fact. The question is not whether it is happening, but rather how we 
are going to address it. Are we going to do all we can to leave the 
next generation a safer and healthier world?
  As my friend from Rhode Island just noted, climate change will be 
costly to our economy and to our very way of life, and the longer we 
wait to act, the more costly these impacts will be.
  Throughout our history, the State of Wisconsin has been a proud home 
to environmental leaders who have worked to pass on a stronger 
environment to future generations--Aldo Leopold, John Muir, and Senator 
Gaylord Nelson, founder of Earth Day and the namesake for the Nelson 
Institute at the University of Wisconsin, which my colleague from Rhode 
Island just mentioned in his remarks. As a representative of our great 
State, it is one of my top priorities to follow in this legacy and to 
preserve our natural resources and quality of life for future 
generations.
  It is not hard to see why Wisconsinites have always deeply valued 
environmental protection. Looking out at the crystal clear waters of 
Lake Superior from its south shore, or standing atop Rib Mountain 
gazing at the forests and farmlands of central Wisconsin, to casting 
your fishing rod in the world-class trout streams of the Driftless 
region in southwestern Wisconsin, there is no question that we are 
blessed by the natural beauty of our State.
  But even now, the impact of climate change can be seen on each of 
these landscapes and in the economies they support. We see it in our 
agriculture--growing seasons are shifting, and extreme weather harms 
our crops, and we have increasing concerns about drought and our 
groundwater.
  In fact, NASA recently warned that within a few decades--within our 
lifetimes--the United States may enter a megadrought that could last 30 
years.
  In my home State, the resulting decreased soil moisture will put 
additional stress on farmers, on private wells, and on municipal 
drinking water systems. These prolonged droughts, combined with 
increased intensity of storm events and changing temperature patterns, 
will force farmers to make changes to how and what they grow. This is 
extremely troubling, as agriculture is an $88 billion industry in my 
home State of Wisconsin.
  We also see the negative effects of climate change on our Great 
Lakes. In Lake Michigan, for example, lake levels are largely driven by 
precipitation. Changes in precipitation patterns due to climate change 
may cause more
dramatic fluctuations or prolonged changes in lake levels.
  In addition, data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration shows that summertime surface water temperatures have 
increased 8 degrees Fahrenheit since 1980. Warmer surface water 
temperatures disrupt the food chain, which threatens our fish 
population. As these adverse effects are expected to worsen in the 
coming decades, they will inevitably lead to more wildlife disease, and 
warmer waters that will drive out native fish.
  Changing water levels also create new challenges for property owners 
and communities along the Great Lakes. Infrastructure may need to be 
redesigned, insurance demands may change, and new health risks may 
emerge or be exacerbated as additional stress is imposed on our sewer 
systems. Each of these will hurt our local economies.
  Tourism is also a major part of Wisconsin's economy, and the 
Northwoods is a favorite destination to fish, camp, hunt, and 
snowmobile. But projections show that by midcentury, the climate of 
areas such as Bayfield and Vilas County in the Northwoods will be more 
similar to what we have known in the southeastern part of the State of 
Wisconsin in counties such as Waukesha County.
  Meanwhile, Waukesha County's climate could be more similar to what we 
used to expect hundreds of miles south in the neighboring State of 
Illinois. The impacts on tourism, recreation, and the landscapes we 
hold near and dear may be dramatic, and the threats may be daunting. 
But we cannot continue to let the challenges overwhelm us and cause 
inaction on our part.
  Wisconsin's State motto is ``Forward.'' The people of Wisconsin have 
never been afraid of the challenges we face or what the future holds. 
We have a strong progressive tradition of confronting our challenges 
and working together to shape our future for the next generation.
  In fact, analysis by the World Resources Institute in 2013 found that 
Wisconsin is well positioned to meet national goals for carbon 
pollution reduction. By extending existing clean energy policies, 
Wisconsin could reduce its emissions substantially in coming years.

[[Page 3219]]

  In addition, many of Wisconsin's most successful companies are 
leaders in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and clean technology. 
They are vital sources of innovation and will provide opportunities for 
the workers of today and tomorrow.
  I believe smart investments by government, by companies and 
institutions, and by citizens will help us confront the challenge of 
climate change, while positioning Wisconsin for 21st century economic 
and ecological resiliency.
  This opportunity is great. We must meet the challenge head on--going 
forward the Wisconsin way.
  I once again thank Senator Whitehouse for his laser focus on this 
issue that is so critical to all of our home States, as well as, 
frankly, the entire global community.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I thank Senator Baldwin for sharing 
this time with me this evening, and for all the wonderful work she does 
on behalf of her home State.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in 
order to proceed to S. 625.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________