[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11848-11850]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             CLIMATE CHANGE

  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, as the Presiding Officer knows, as he 
has suffered through a considerable number of them, this is the 107th 
time I have come to the floor to urge my colleagues to wake up to the 
threat of climate change. All over the United States, State by State by 
State, we are already seeing the real effects of carbon pollution. We 
see it in our atmosphere, we see it in our oceans, and we see it in our 
weather, in habitats, and in species.
  The American people see it. Two-thirds of Americans, including half 
of Republicans, favor government action to reduce global warming, and 
two-thirds, including half of Republicans, would be more likely to vote 
for a candidate who campaigns on fighting climate change.
  Polling from the Florida Atlantic University shows that more than 73 
percent of U.S. Hispanics--a pretty key voting block--think global 
warming is a serious problem. Sixty-two percent of Republican Hispanics 
are concerned about this. And I have said this before: If you ask 
Republican voters under the age of 35, they will tell us that climate 
denial is ``out of touch,'' ``ignorant,'' or ``crazy.'' Those are the 
words they selected in the poll--not my words.
  So we might expect Presidential hopefuls to incorporate climate 
action into their campaign platforms. We might expect the Republican 
candidates to address this problem in an honest and straightforward 
manner. But we would be wrong. What have we seen from the Presidential 
hopefuls? These candidates avoid any serious talk of climate change 
even as their own home States face climate and ocean disruptions.
  So in the weeks ahead, I will take a look at the Presidential 
candidates on climate change and what is up in their home States. Today 
I will look at Florida, home to 20 million Americans, including two of 
the top Republican Presidential candidates.
  A swing State with 29 electoral votes, Florida is a major political 
prize. Florida is also ground zero for climate change. With over 1,200 
miles of coastline, Florida is uniquely vulnerable, for instance, to 
sea level rise. So what do Florida's two Presidential candidates have 
to say about climate change? Well, it seems they are not sure.
  ``I don't think the science is clear of what percentage is man-made 
and what percentage is natural. It's convoluted,'' says former Florida 
Governor Jeb Bush.

       ``[T]here's never been a moment where the climate is not 
     changing,'' says Florida's junior Senator. ``The question is: 
     what percentage of that . . . is due to human activity?''

  Scientists tell us that warming is ``unequivocal''--that is a strong 
word for scientists to use, unequivocal--and that human activity is the 
dominant cause of the changes we have seen--indeed, the only plausibly 
valid explanation.
  Both Presidential hopefuls from Florida have invoked the now classic 
denial line ``I am not a scientist.'' Well, good

[[Page 11849]]

thing, then, that we are not elected to be scientists. We are elected 
to listen to them. And if these two Floridians were listening to their 
own best scientists, they would learn a lot.
  In fact, 42 scientists from Florida colleges and universities wrote 
an open letter to Florida State officials. ``It is crucial for 
policymakers to understand,'' they wrote, ``that human activity is 
affecting the composition of the atmosphere which will lead to adverse 
effects on human economies, health and well being''--not so convoluted 
after all.
  The letter continued:

       The problem of climate change is not a hypothetical. 
     Thousands of scientists have studied the issue from a variety 
     of angles and disciplines over many decades. Those of us 
     signing this statement have spent hundreds of years combined 
     studying this problem, not from any partisan political 
     perspective, but as scientists--seekers of evidence and 
     explanations. As a result, we feel uniquely qualified to 
     assist policymakers in finding solutions to adapt and 
     mitigate so we can protect the people of this state and their 
     enterprises and property.

  So it is OK if we are not scientists. The scientists are there to 
help. They have offered to, and they understand this.
  While my Senate colleague from Florida is unsure about his own home 
State climate science, he seems quite certain about the economics of 
policies to curb carbon pollution, such as cap and trade. ``I can tell 
you with certainty,'' he has said, ``it would have a devastating impact 
on our economy.''
  I would suggest that the Senator from Florida take a closer look at 
the facts because his position on these two issues boils down to wrong 
and wronger. I know this because my home State is one of nine 
Northeastern States that require utilities to buy carbon emissions 
allowances. We are actually doing it. The proceeds are directed back 
into the regional economy through things such as energy efficiency 
investments and renewable energy projects. And we have the results. The 
results are in. Just from 2012 to 2014, the program generated $1.3 
billion in economic benefits for New England, and it saved consumers 
over $400 million in energy costs. This climate solution was a boost to 
the economy, and it cut carbon dioxide emissions in the region by a 
quarter.
  The Republican candidates from Florida are running against the facts 
and they are running against the opinions of experts and local leaders 
in their own home State. In a June 19 editorial, the Sun Sentinel 
praised Pope Francis's recent encyclical on climate change and its call 
to swift action, because of the threat climate change poses to South 
Florida. The editors wrote that ``the Pope's declaration puts pressure 
on [the candidates] . . . because they are Floridians . . . and because 
they aspire to be national leaders.'' The editors continue: 
``Candidates who aspire to be inclusive, effective leaders cannot see . 
. . science through a political lens.'' That is the Sun Sentinel.
  Archbishop Thomas Wenski of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami 
explained Pope Francis's message to the Miami Herald. ``What the Pope 
is saying is, `Let's talk about this,''' the archbishop said. ``And 
that requires--whether you're a Democrat or Republican or left or 
right--it requires that you transcend your particular interest or 
ideological lens and look at the issue from the common good.''
  For Florida, that common good is imperiled by climate change. South 
Florida has seen almost 1 foot of sea level rise in the last 100 years. 
The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Compact is a bipartisan 
coalition--Republicans and Democrats--of four South Florida counties. 
Those four South Florida counties predict that the waters around 
southeast Florida could surge up to another 2 feet in less than 50 
years. Our children will live to see that.
  I visited Florida on my climate tour last year. I heard firsthand 
about the threats climate change poses to the Sunshine State from Glenn 
Landers, senior engineer at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 
Everglades Division. Engineer Landers has worked on water resources and 
restoration projects in Florida for nearly 20 years. This is the map he 
used to show me what just 2 feet of sea level rise means for South 
Florida. What it means for South Florida is there is a lot less of 
South Florida above water.
  Florida is home to some of the country's top universities and 
research institutions. The Florida Climate Institute is a network of 
scientists and research programs from eight universities, including the 
University of Florida, Florida State, and the University of Miami. The 
Florida Climate Institute is dedicated to ``climate research in service 
of society.'' These are some of Florida's brightest minds.
  Recognizing businesses' and communities' need for useful data and 
solutions that are based on Florida's unique characteristics, the 
Florida Climate Institute publishes research to help improve 
understanding of the increasing climate variability in Florida. If 
Florida's leaders respond responsibly to the changing climate, writes 
the group, ``Florida is well positioned to become a center of 
excellence for climate change research and education and a test bed for 
innovations in climate adaptation.''
  Well, responsible officials in Florida are already taking action. My 
friend the senior Senator from Florida took the Senate commerce 
committee to Miami Beach town hall to examine the dangers posed by 
rising seas. The Miami Herald said this about Senator Nelson's efforts 
to raise awareness about the threat to his State:

       South Florida owes [Senator] Nelson its thanks for shining 
     a bright light on this issue. Everyone from local residents 
     to elected officials should follow his lead, turning 
     awareness of this major environmental issue into action. It 
     is critical to saving our region.

  In Fort Lauderdale, Mayor Jack Seiler is working with NOAA and State 
and Broward County officials and the South Florida Regional Planning 
Council to protect his city from flooding and climate change. Yet on 
climate change, Florida's own Presidential candidates have got nothing. 
Zero. No plan.
  Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine showed me the huge pumps his city has 
installed to pump out the floodwaters that come in on high tides from 
the rising seas and with storms. Each pump can move 14,000 gallons of 
water per minute. Imagine that. But Florida's Presidential candidates 
have no plan.
  The mayor of Monroe County, Sylvia Murphy, a Republican, has put 
climate and energy policy at the heart of her 20-year growth plan for 
the county. Why? Her county covers all of the Florida Keys and some of 
the Everglades. She is going to lose a lot of it if we don't get ahead 
of this, and she also sees what is happening to her reefs offshore.
  Yet, despite the overwhelming consensus of scientists in their own 
State, Florida's Republican Presidential candidates have got nothing. 
The junior Senator from Florida even suggested that we should wait for 
China to take action before we address this problem.
  The junior Senator from Florida, on foreign policy, has spoken often 
about the need for American leadership on issues of global importance, 
saying, for instance, that America must ``continue to hold this torch'' 
of peace and liberty. Earlier this year, Jeb Bush echoed that 
sentiment, saying, ``American leadership projected consistently and 
grounded in principle has been a benefit to the world.'' Well, fine 
words, but where is their leadership on climate change? They got 
nothing.
  It is our responsibility as a great nation to set an example for 
others to follow, not to sit back and wait for others to act. Failing 
to act on climate change would both dim our own national torch and give 
other nations an excuse for delay. Failure, with the stakes this high, 
becomes an argument for our enemies against our very model of 
government. As Pope Francis said, ``The world will not forget this 
failure of conscience and responsibility.'' We will own that.
  The question is why Republican Presidential candidates refuse to 
engage on climate change. They ignore their own home State 
universities. They ignore their own home State mayors, local officials. 
They ignore their own home

[[Page 11850]]

State engineers. Why? Why, when the evidence is so plain? Why the 
pretense that climate solutions are bad for the economy when actual 
experience proves that is not true? Why the pretense? Why can't they 
credibly speak about America's responsibility to lead? Why would they 
have us ignore one of the most pressing national and global issues of 
our time?
  All I can hope, for their sake and for ours, is that they soon wake 
up.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. PERDUE. Mr. President, I ask to speak for up to 5 minutes in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.

                          ____________________