[House Report 116-41]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


116th Congress   }                                  {     Rept. 116-41
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session     }                                  {           Part 2

======================================================================



 
                         CLIMATE ACTION NOW ACT

                                _______
                                

 April 18, 2019.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Pallone, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                         [To accompany H.R. 9]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 9) to direct the President to develop a plan for 
the United States to meet its nationally determined 
contribution under the Paris Agreement, and for other purposes, 
having considered the same, report favorably thereon without 
amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Committee Hearings...............................................     5
Committee Consideration..........................................     5
Committee Votes..................................................     6
Oversight Findings...............................................    13
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures    13
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................    13
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................    14
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............    14
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    15
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    15
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......    15
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    15
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    15
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    15
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    16
Dissenting Views.................................................    17

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    H.R. 9, the ``Climate Action Now Act'', was introduced on 
March 27, 2019, by Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), and referred to 
the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce. H.R. 9, the ``Climate Action Now Act'', directs 
the President to develop a plan for the United States to meet 
its nationally determined contribution (NDC) under the Paris 
Agreement, and it bars the President from using appropriated 
funds to take any action to advance the withdrawal of the 
United States from the Paris Agreement.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    The United States ratified the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, in October 1992.\1\ It was the first 
international treaty to acknowledge ``that change in the 
Earth's climate and its adverse effects are a common concern of 
humankind.'' It also expressed concern ``that human activities 
have been substantially increasing the atmospheric 
concentrations of greenhouse gases, that these increases 
enhance the natural greenhouse effect, and that this will 
result on average in an additional warming of the Earth's 
surface and atmosphere and may adversely affect natural 
ecosystems and humankind.''\2\ According to the UNFCCC, ``[t]he 
ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal 
instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to 
achieve . . . stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in 
the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous 
anthropogenic interference with the climate system.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Senate Ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention 
on Climate Change, U.S. Treaty No. 102-38 (Oct. 7, 1992) 
(www.congress.gov/treaty-document/102nd-congress/38).
    \2\United Nations, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 
Change (1992).
    \3\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On December 12, 2015, in Paris, France, Parties to the 
UNFCCC reached an agreement designed to combat climate change 
by accelerating and intensifying the actions needed to 
strengthen the global response.\4\ The Agreement was adopted 
under and intended to enhance the implementation of the UNFCCC. 
A key goal of the Paris Agreement is to limit global average 
temperature rise to well below two degrees Celsius (+C) above 
pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit the increase 
to 1.5 +C. On September 3, 2016, the United States accepted the 
Paris Agreement, which ultimately entered into force on 
November 4, 2016.\5\ To date, nearly 200 countries have joined 
the Paris Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, The Paris 
Agreement (2015).
    \5\United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Paris 
Agreement--Status of Ratification (unfccc.int/process/the-paris-
agreement/status-of-ratification) (accessed Apr. 16, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Paris Agreement established a framework in which all 
parties submit NDCs based on their individual domestic 
circumstances and priorities.\6\ The Agreement does not impose 
specific emission reduction procedures or methods. The United 
States submitted its initial NDC on March 31, 2015, pledging to 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions 26-28 percent below 2005 levels 
by 2025.\7\ This target reflects ``opportunities under existing 
regulatory authorities to reduce emissions in 2025 of all 
greenhouse gases from all sources in every economic 
sector.''\8\ Specific measures included in the U.S. NDC are: 
strengthening fuel economy standards for light-duty and heavy-
duty vehicles;\9\ determinations to establish improved energy 
efficiency codes for commercial and residential buildings;\10\ 
strengthening energy efficiency standards for appliances and 
equipment;\11\ approving alternatives to and reducing the use 
of hydrofluorocarbons;\12\ establishing carbon pollution 
standards from new and existing power plants;\13\ and 
establishing standards to reduce methane emissions from 
landfills\14\ and oil and gas operations.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\See note 4.
    \7\United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, United 
States of America First Nationally Determined Contribution (Mar. 9, 
2016) (www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/
United%20States%20of%20America%20First/
U.S.A.%20First%20NDC%20Submission.pdf).
    \8\Id.
    \9\Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration, 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle 
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, 
77 Fed. Reg. 62624 (Oct. 15, 2012); Environmental Protection Agency and 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Greenhouse Gas 
Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty 
Engines and Vehicles--Phase 2, 81 Fed. Reg. 73478 (Oct. 25, 2016).
    \10\Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486; Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007, Public Law 110-140; See, e.g., 
Department of Energy, Final Determination Regarding Energy Efficiency 
Improvements in ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016: Energy Standard for 
Buildings, Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, 83 Fed. Reg. 8463 
(Feb. 27, 2018).
    \11\Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486; Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007, Public Law 110-140; See, e.g., 
Michael B. Gerrard and John C. Dernbach, Legal Pathways to Deep 
Decarbonization in the United States: Summary and Key Recommendations, 
Chapter 9 (2018).
    \12\See, e.g., Environmental Protection Agency, Protection of 
Stratospheric Ozone: Rule 20, 80 Fed. Reg. 42870 (Jul. 20, 2015); 
Environmental Protection Agency, Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 
Rule 21, 81 Fed. Reg. 86778 (Dec. 1, 2016); Environmental Protection 
Agency, Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Determination 31 for 
Significant New Alternatives Policy Program, 81 Fed. Reg. 32241 (May 
23, 2016).
    \13\Environmental Protection Agency, Carbon Pollution Emission 
Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating 
Units, 80 Fed. Reg. 64662 (Oct. 23, 2015); Environmental Protection 
Agency, Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New, 
Modified, and Reconstructed Stationary Sources: Electric Utility 
Generating Units, 80 Fed. Reg. 64510 (Oct. 23, 2015).
    \14\Environmental Protection Agency, Standards of Performance for 
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, 81 Fed. Reg. 59332 (Aug. 29, 2016); 
Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Guidelines and Compliance 
Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, 81 Fed. Reg. 59276 (Aug. 29, 
2016).
    \15\Environmental Protection Agency, Oil and Natural Gas Sector: 
Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources, 81 
Fed. Reg. 35824 (Jun. 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The legal authorities for actions included in the U.S. NDC 
are derived from existing domestic laws, most of which are 
products of the Committee on Energy and Commerce that received 
broad bipartisan support from Congress.\16\ These existing 
laws, regulations, and other domestic mandatory measures 
relevant to the achievement of the U.S. NDC target are subject 
to various transparency and public participation requirements, 
and also are subject to judicial review.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et seq.; Energy Policy and Conservation 
Act, Public Law 94-163 (1975); Energy Conservation and Production Act, 
Public Law 94-385 (1976); National Climate Program Act, Public Law 95-
367 (1978); National Energy Policy Conservation Act, Public Law 95-619 
(1978); Global Climate Protection Act of 1987, Public Law 100-204; 
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Technology Competitiveness Act 
of 1989, Public Law 101-218; Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-
486; Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58; Energy Independence 
and Security Act of 2007, Public Law 110-140.
    \17\Administrative Procedures Act, Public Law 79-404 (1946); 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Public Law 96-511; Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, Public Law 96-354 (1980); Congressional Review Act, 
Public Law 104-121 (1996); Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, Public Law 
104-4; Exec. Order No. 12866, 58 Fed. Reg. 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993); Exec. 
Order No. 13563, 76 Fed. Reg. 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011); Exec. Order No. 
13132, 64 Fed. Reg. 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999); Exec. Order No. 13175, 65 
Fed. Reg. 67249 (Nov. 6, 2000); Exec. Order No. 13771, 82 Fed. Reg. 
9339 (Jan. 30, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced his intention to 
withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement.\18\ Under 
the terms of the Agreement, the United States cannot give 
formal notice of withdrawal until November 4, 2019, with the 
withdrawal taking effect one year later. Since that 
announcement, the Trump Administration has withdrawn, revised, 
or slowed most of the emission-reducing actions included in the 
U.S. NDC and initiated by the Obama Administration. In 
virtually every case, the Administration's actions would put 
the United States on a path to further exacerbate climate 
change by increasing greenhouse gas and other pollution, while 
undermining the competitiveness of U.S. businesses and 
increasing consumer energy costs.\19\ Testimony at the February 
28, 2019, hearing indicated that the ``current rollback of 
mitigation policies by the United States''\20\ is contributing 
to the possibility of an average global temperature increase of 
approximately 3 +C by the end of the century, even with the 
ambitious global actions pledged under the Paris Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\The White House, Statement by President Trump on the Paris 
Climate Accord (Jun. 1, 2017).
    \19\See, e.g., Environmental Protection Agency, Regulatory Impact 
Analysis for the Review of the Clean Power Plan: Proposal (October 
2017); Environmental Protection Agency, Regulatory Impact Analysis for 
the Proposed Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from 
Existing Electric Utility Generating Units; Revisions to Emission 
Guideline Implementing Regulations; Revisions to New Source Review 
Program (Aug. 2018); Environmental Protection Agency and National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Preliminary Regulatory Impact 
Analysis: The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for 
Model Year2021--2026Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (Oct. 2018).
    \20\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Hearing on ``We'll 
Always Have Paris: Filling the Leadership Void Caused by Federal 
Inaction on Climate Change'' (Testimony of Andrew Light, World 
Resources Institute), 116th Cong. (Feb. 28, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Furthermore, new scientific analyses indicate that the 
window for meaningful climate action is shrinking faster than 
previously expected, and the effects will be far greater and 
felt more intensely by every part of the country. On November 
23, 2018, the U.S. Global Change Research Program released its 
Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA) describing the impacts 
of climate change on the United States.\21\ The NCA warned 
that, in the absence of climate action, average global 
temperatures could rise by at least 3 +C by 2100. The report 
also projected that inaction will lead to significant economic 
and other damages in the coming decades. The NCA was released 
shortly after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 
(IPCC) released its special report warning that without more 
aggressive action to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, the world 
would likely exceed the 1.5 +C threshold, committing us to ever 
more serious effects of global warming.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\U.S. Global Change Research Program, Fourth National Climate 
Assessment (Nov. 2018).
    \22\Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Special 
Report on Global Warming of 1.5+C (Oct. 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In response, H.R. 9 would take an important step to ensure 
the United States is on track to make the emissions reductions 
needed to avoid catastrophic climate change. The purpose of 
H.R. 9 is to ensure the United States does not withdraw from 
the Paris Agreement and honors its NDC. It directs the 
President to develop a plan to achieve the greenhouse gas 
pollution reductions in our NDC and provide the plan to the 
public and to Congress. Consistent with the Paris Agreement, 
H.R. 9 is technology neutral, and does not mandate or prohibit 
the use of any specific technology for achieving the necessary 
emissions reductions. Further, H.R. 9 does not tie the 
President to the specific components of the U.S. NDC prepared 
by the previous Administration; rather, section 4 gives the 
President the opportunity to develop his own plan to meet 
emission reduction targets. The goal of the plan provided for 
in section 4 is consistent with the goals of long-standing U.S. 
policy\23\ and existing domestic laws governing energy 
conservation, public health, and environmental protection. It 
is also consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\See, e.g., Global Climate Protection Act of 1987, Public Law 
100-204; Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           COMMITTEE HEARINGS

    For the purposes of section 103(i) of H. Res. 6 of the 
116th Congress--
    (1) the following hearing was used to develop or consider 
H.R. 9:
    The Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change held a 
hearing on February 28, 2019, entitled ``We'll Always Have 
Paris: Filling the Leadership Void Caused by Federal Inaction 
on Climate Change.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
           Andrew Light, Distinguished Senior Fellow, 
        World Resources Institute;
           Carla Frisch, Principal, Rocky Mountain 
        Institute;
           Nathan Hultman, Director, Center for Global 
        Sustainability, Associate Professor, University of 
        Maryland School of Public Policy;
           Samuel Thernstrom, Chief Executive Officer, 
        Energy Innovation Reform Project (2) the following 
        related hearing was held:
    The Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change held a 
hearing on April 2, 2019, entitled ``Lessons from Across the 
Nation: State and Local Action to Combat Climate Change.'' The 
Subcommittee received testimony from:
           The Honorable Jay Inslee, Governor of the 
        State of Washington;
           The Honorable Jacqueline Biskupski, Mayor of 
        the City of Salt Lake City, Utah;
           The Honorable James Brainard, Mayor of the 
        City of Carmel, Indiana;
           The Honorable Daniel C. Camp III, Chairman 
        of the Beaver County Board of Commissioners, Beaver 
        County, Pennsylvania;
           The Honorable Jerry F. Morales, Mayor of the 
        City of Midland, Texas.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    H.R. 9, the ``Climate Action Now Act'', was introduced in 
the House of Representatives on March 27, 2019, by Rep. Kathy 
Castor (D-FL), and referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
and the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The full Committee on 
Energy and Commerce met in open markup session, pursuant to 
notice, on April 4, 2019, to consider H.R. 9. At the conclusion 
of consideration and markup of the bill, the Committee agreed 
to a motion by Mr. Pallone, Chairman of the Committee, to order 
H.R. 9 favorably reported to the House, without amendment.

                            COMMITTEE VOTES

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires the Committee to list each record vote 
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. The 
Committee advises that there were six record votes taken on 
H.R. 9, including a motion by Mr. Pallone ordering H.R. 9 
favorably reported to the House, without amendment. The motion 
on final passage of the bill was approved by a record vote of 
29 yeas to 19 nays. The following are the record votes taken 
during Committee consideration, including the names of those 
members voting for and against:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                           OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 2(b)(1) 
of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are 
reflected in the descriptive portion of the report.

   NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, ENTITLEMENT AUTHORITY, AND TAX EXPENDITURES

    Pursuant to 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the Committee adopts as its own the 
estimate of new budget authority, entitlement authority, or tax 
expenditures or revenues contained in the cost estimate 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 15, 2019.
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 9, the Climate 
Action Now Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Stephen 
Rabent and Sunita D'Monte.
            Sincerely,
                                                Keith Hall,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    H.R. 9 would prohibit funds from being authorized to be 
appropriated, obligated, or expended to take actions to 
withdraw the United States from the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change's 21st Conference of Parties in 
Paris, France (known as the Paris Agreement). CBO estimates 
that the prohibition would have no significant effect on the 
federal budget because the costs to implement the withdrawal 
under the Paris Agreement would be negligible.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\President Trump announced that the United States would withdraw 
from the Paris Agreement in June 2017. However, under the Agreement the 
earliest the United States can give official written notice of its 
intent to withdraw is November 2019 and the earliest that withdrawal 
may take effect is one year after that notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 9 also would require the President to develop a public 
plan for the United States to meet certain targets for 
greenhouse gas emissions as agreed to under the Paris Agreement 
and how the United States will confirm other parties to the 
Paris Agreement are fulfilling their targets. That plan would 
be updated annually. H.R. 9 does not require the United States 
to implement the plan nor prescribe the scope or level of 
detail required in the plan.
    The costs to implement those provisions of H.R. 9 could 
vary significantly depending on the level of effort federal 
agencies would devote to prepare the required plan. Agencies 
could adapt previously developed plans to fulfill the bill's 
requirements, such as those previously produced by the 
Department of State or Environmental Protection Agency in 
recent years. On the other hand, agencies may produce new plans 
that provide specific actions, policy recommendations, and 
regulatory and legislative proposals that also would fulfill 
the bill's requirements. Based on information from the 
Administration, CBO estimates that agencies would expend 
minimal efforts to prepare the required plan at a cost of $1 
million over the 2019-2024 period; such spending would be 
subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
    On April 15, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 9, 
the Climate Action Now Act, as ordered reported by the House 
Committee on Energy and Commerce on April 4, 2019. The two 
bills are similar and CBO's estimates of the budgetary effects 
are the same.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate is Stephen Rabent 
and Sunita D'Monte. The estimate was reviewed by Theresa Gullo, 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                       FEDERAL MANDATES STATEMENT

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general 
performance goal or objective of this legislation is to ensure 
the United States continues to participate in the global effort 
to respond to the threat of climate change by remaining a party 
to the Paris Agreement and fulfilling its commitment to 
reducing greenhouse gas emissions of the United States through 
implementation of its domestic laws.

                    DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of 
H.R. 9 is known to be duplicative of another Federal program, 
including any program that was included in a report to Congress 
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 or the most recent 
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

       EARMARK, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, AND LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS

    Pursuant to clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI, the 
Committee finds that H.R. 9 contains no earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                      ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE LEGISLATION

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 designates that the short title may be cited as 
the ``Climate Action Now Act''.

Sec. 2. Findings

    Section 2 lists eight findings of Congress about the Paris 
Agreement.

Sec. 3. Prohibition on use of funds to advance the withdrawal of the 
        United States from the Paris Agreement

    Section 3 prevents the expenditure of any funds to advance 
the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement.

Sec. 4. Plan for the United States to meet its nationally determined 
        contribution under the Paris Agreement.

    Paragraph (a) of this section requires the President to 
develop a plan for the United States to meet its nationally 
determined contribution under the Paris Agreement and to submit 
the plan to Congress and make the plan available to the public 
within 120 days of the bill's enactment. The plan is to 
describe how the United States will meet an economy-wide target 
of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 
its 2005 level by 2025, and how the United States will use the 
Paris Agreement's transparency provisions to ensure other 
parties to the Agreement are fulfilling their announced 
contributions to the Agreement.
    Paragraph (b) of this section requires the President to 
update the plan within one year of the bill's enactment and 
annually thereafter.
    Paragraph (c) defines the Congressional Committees 
designated to receive the plan as the Committees on Foreign 
Affairs and Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives 
and the Committees on Foreign Relations, Environment and Public 
Works, and Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.

Sec. 5. Paris Agreement defined

    This section defines the Paris Agreement as the decision by 
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change's 
21st Conference of the Parties in Paris, France, adopted on 
December 12, 2015.

         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    There are no changes to existing law made by the bill H.R. 
9.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    There are many bi-partisan policies Congress may pursue, as 
it has been pursuing in recent years, to address meaningfully 
climate risks, help communities adapt to future risks, and 
accelerate the innovation, technological advancement, and 
American competitiveness necessary for a secure, safe, and 
prosperous society.
    Unfortunately, H.R. 9 is not one of those policies. H.R. 9 
is an entirely partisan bill. And it is a defective bill.
    H.R. 9 was introduced by Representative Castor on 
Wednesday, March 27, and put on the full Committee markup 
calendar three business days later, on April 1--without 
Subcommittee legislative hearing or markup. The Majority then 
moved H.R. 9 though the full Committee markup on April 4 and 
reported the bill without amendment. At this point, we 
understand it is being reported to the House without the 
benefit of any legislative hearing or amendment in a Committee 
of jurisdiction.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\The House Foreign Affairs Committee conducted a markup and 
reported H.R. 9 without amendment on April 9, 2019 at https://
foreignaffairs.house.gov/_cache/files/2/e/2eb12762-5b1f-49eb-a4be-
f34c27fce384/D863FCF8A2343318BC43AC794ED36363.04.09.2019-hfac-markup-
summary.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As the Majority knows well, when considering policies that 
could have profound impact on millions of constituents--and 
indeed the economic and security interests of the United 
States--regular order is essential. It is necessary to 
understand and address defects and develop bi-partisan 
consensus on effective legislative measures. When 
bipartisanship cannot be achieved, regular order allows all 
voices to be heard throughout the process and provides for 
fuller information and cross-examination of ideas and 
proposals. H.R. 9 was not considered under regular order.
    H.R. 9 withholds funds from the President to prevent taking 
any steps to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, a withdrawal 
that would be done under terms negotiated and supported by the 
previous Administration.\2\ It also requires the President to 
develop a plan to implement the previous Administration's so-
called ``commitments'' for economy-wide emissions reductions, 
the consequences of which received no scrutiny by the Majority 
(or the Committee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\See Article 28 of the Paris Agreement at https://unfccc.int/
sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 9 represents the Majority's reflexive response to 
President Trump's June 1, 2017 announcement that the United 
States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement and begin 
negotiations either to reenter or negotiate an entirely new 
arrangement.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\See Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord at 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-
trump-paris-climate-accord/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In announcing the intention to withdraw, the President 
cited serious harms to U.S. international competitiveness, 
workers, consumers, and taxpayers from compliance with the 
terms of the Agreement and concluded that: ``The Paris Accord 
would undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our 
sovereignty, impose unacceptable legal risks, and put us at 
permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the 
world.''\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee's own oversight and legislative record in the 
previous four Congresses produced ample evidence to confirm the 
potential harms from the Paris Agreement and related U.S. 
commitments. In the runup to the Paris negotiations, the 
Committee examined closely the Obama Administration's 
greenhouse gas emissions control initiatives, enshrined in its 
Climate Action Plan,\5\ and especially the imposition of its 
Clean Power Plan and related electric sector regulations, which 
had been a central feature in support of U.S. pledges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\See The President's Climate Action Plan, Executive Office of the 
President, June 2013. The plan entailed a suite of actions, including 
electric sector emissions reductions, oil and gas sector methane 
emissions reductions, auto fuel economy standards, energy efficiency 
initiatives.
    \6\See references to the Clean Power Plan in the U.S. Intended 
Nationally Determined Contribution and the 2016 Second Biennial Report 
of the United States of America Under the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The evidence collected through numerous Committee oversight 
and legislative hearings showed how these electric sector 
regulations, premised on an obscure and misinterpreted 
provision in the Clean Air Act, would have produced a radical 
and expensive transformation in the supply and delivery of 
electric power; threatened to drive out of the U.S. markets 
major sources of affordable energy, undermined reliability and 
security, and increased consumer utility bills.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\See, for example, https://republicans-energycommerce.house.gov/
news/fact-sheet/hr-2042-ratepayer-protection-act-0/. The regulations 
prompted State governors, regulators, and other stakeholders to 
challenge the legality of the regulations, which the current 
Administration is now seeking to replace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Majority could have done the public a service to review 
this record and explore what meeting the U.S. commitments would 
truly entail. Instead, Members and the public were deprived of 
a close examination of the costs and feasibility of all the 
air, transport, industrial, and agricultural regulations 
necessary to meet the timelines proposed in the U.S. 
commitments--timelines that aim for ``deep decarbonization'' by 
2050.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\See U.S. Intended Nationally Determined Contribution, which 
states: ``This [2025] target is consistent with a straight line 
emission reduction pathway from 2020 to deep, economy-wide reductions 
of 80% or more by 2050.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee would have benefited from a close look at why 
the Obama Administration did not provide the public a complete 
plan to meet the 2025 commitments. What it managed to implement 
fell short in emissions targets by upwards of 40 percent using 
the most optimistic assumptions.\9\ Such an examination would 
have revealed the costs of trying to regulate through emissions 
caps when there are not yet technologies available to meet the 
reductions affordably and reliably.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\The Obama Administration reported its implemented and proposed 
policies, would, under the most optimistic assumptions about natural 
emissions sinks, reach about 60% of the emissions reductions to meet 
Paris commitments, according to 2016 Second Biennial Report of the 
United States of America Under the United Nations Framework Convention 
on Climate Change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Compounding H.R. 9 defects is the unquestioning focus on 
U.S. domestic action, while all evidence indicates the bulk of 
future global emissions growth will be in China, India, and the 
rest of the developing world. Recent projections by the 
International Energy Agency show that fossil energy, even with 
all existing and announced policies implemented, will remain 
the dominant form of energy in our global systems through 2040, 
and likely beyond.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\See World Energy Outlook, International Energy Agency at 
https://www.iea.org/weo/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We must recognize that this is a global issue that requires 
global solutions. And there are some hard realities that make 
global emissions reductions challenging. In 1990, energy-
related carbon dioxide emissions were 20.5 gigatons. By 2018, 
energy-related CO2 emissions had increased to 33.2 gigatons, or 
by 62 percent, according to the most recent report form the 
International Energy Agency.\11\ This growth has occurred 
despite nearly 30 years of international climate agreements. 
And it will continue as nations seek the tremendous benefits of 
energy and power in their societies and as developing nations 
especially acquire the steel, cement, and other infrastructure 
needed for building and expanding the world's cities; the 
world's building stock alone is expected to double by 2060, the 
equivalent of building an entire New York City every single 
month for forty years.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\See Global Energy & CO2 Status Report, International Energy 
Agency, March 2019, at https://www.iea.org/geco/emissions/.
    \12\See Our 2019 Annual Letter, Bill and Melinda Gates, noting ``As 
the urban population continues to grow in coming decades, the world's 
building stock is expected to double by 2060--the equivalent of adding 
another New York City monthly between now and then. That's a lot of 
cement and steel. We need to find a way to make it all without 
worsening climate change.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Consider just energy related emissions: between 2017 to 
2018 alone, global emissions of carbon dioxide increased by 560 
million metric tons--a half gigaton. China's emissions 
increased by 230 million metric tons, or a little more than 40 
percent of the worldwide increase. Meanwhile, as U.S. energy 
emissions also tracked up, the IEA notes: ``Despite this 
increase, emissions in the United States remain around their 
1990 levels [which is] 14 [percent] and 800 million tons of CO2 
below their peak in 2000. This is the largest absolute decline 
among all countries since 2000.''\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\Op. Cit., Global Energy & CO2 Status Report,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While the previous Administration committed the U.S. to 
expensive domestic action to increase its rate of emissions 
cuts, the Paris Agreement allows global growth in emissions to 
continue at a rapid pace in developing nations and especially 
among the United States' chief competitors and adversaries.
    As we learned from information submitted at one hearing, 
Russia, the world's number five greenhouse gas emitter, right 
after the European Union, pledged it would reduce missions by 
up to 30 percent below its 1990 baseline. But Russia's 
emissions were already 50 percent below the 1990 baseline, 
which was set as the Soviet Union collapsed. This gives Russia 
room to increase its emissions substantially--giving Russian 
industry a competitive advantage.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\See February 27, 2019 Letter to Committee from Steve Eule, Vice 
President for Climate & Technology, Global Energy Institute, U.S. 
Chamber of Commerce, Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change 
Hearing ``We'll Always Have Paris: Filling the Leadership Void Caused 
by Federal Inaction on Climate Change,'' February 28, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    India, the world's number three emitter, committed to 
reducing its carbon dioxide emissions intensity (emissions per 
unit of GDP) by 33 percent to 35 percent by the 2030s, a goal 
which would still allow emissions growth of 65 percent by 2030, 
driven in part by the announced doubling of domestic coal 
output shortly after the Paris agreement. Moreover, the 
commitment is conditional on financial assistance and 
technology transfer from developed nations estimated at upwards 
of $2.5 trillion.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    China, the world's top greenhouse gas emitter, pledged to 
peak its carbon dioxide emissions around 2030 and make its best 
efforts to peak early. It pledged to reduce its carbon dioxide 
emissions intensity by 60 percent to 65 percent. Yet data from 
the previous 25 years show China has already been reducing 
intensity at about this rate, so the commitments mean business 
as usual.\16\ Whatever the progress, the essential deal placed 
the United States at a substantial strategic disadvantage as 
China pursues unbridled efforts to expand manufacturing and 
exports around the world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Majority's focus on the Obama Administration's economy-
wide emissions commitments is not a realistic solution to 
global emissions growth. Enforcing the commitments through 
regulations here at home, however, could create realistic 
hardship on our electricity, transportation, and industrial 
sectors in communities around the nation. H.R. 9, in short, is 
a solution that threatens the nation's pursuit of its other 
security and economic priorities, without addressing the 
underlying global emissions challenge.
    The challenge is to focus on what is necessary for future 
energy systems, transportation systems, manufacturing, and 
industry to emit fewer greenhouse gases. This is a 
technological challenge. And without the technological fixes, 
international agreements will not work.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\See, for example, testimony of Sam Thernstrom, Energy 
Innovation Reform Project, before the Subcommittee on Environment and 
Climate Change Hearing, ``We'll Always Have Paris. Filling the 
Leadership Void Caused by Federal Inaction on Climate Change,'' 
February 28, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Had the Majority investigated the details of U.S. 
commitments, the potential impacts of policies to meet those 
commitments, and the relative quality of other nation's 
promises, we suspect their unquestioning support for H.R. 9 
would wither away.
    Had the Majority reviewed the reasons why the Obama 
Administration could not reach bipartisan consensus on its 
greenhouse gas policies and could not create a durable 
agreement through the advice and consent of the Senate, we 
suspect it would have devised a more thoughtful path to U.S. 
climate change policy.
    But as reflected in H.R. 9, the Majority choose its well-
worn path. Indeed, the Majority rejected every Minority 
amendment offered at markup, including amendments that sought 
to protect consumers from energy-price impacts, that sought to 
ensure that any planning include essential clean technologies 
like nuclear and hydropower, that sought to ensure the 
continued global emissions benefits of the nation's natural gas 
exports, and that sought to ensure that the United States not 
bind itself to commitments that put it at a strategic 
disadvantage to China or Russia, which have gamely avoided 
economically harmful climate policies. As it is, we cannot 
support favorably reporting this bill to the House floor.
    Rather than pursue this plainly defective and partisan 
bill, the Committee should have continued examining bi-partisan 
policies focused on the innovation and the adaptive capacity of 
the nation and its communities, recognized the scale of the 
global technological challenge, the benefits of modern energy 
and industrial systems, and sought out the ingredients to 
technological advances and continued U.S. competitiveness and 
security.

                                   Greg Walden,
                                           Republican Leader.
                                   John Shimkus,
                                           Republican Leader, 
                                               Subcommittee on 
                                               Environment and Climate 
                                               Change.

                                  [all]