Washington, D.C., November 12, 1998 — In statements released today, consumers, senior citizens, small business, minority, and public policy groups denounced the President’s signing of the Kyoto Protocol — the global warming treaty. The non-profit groups stressed the high human costs of the treaty’s drastic restrictions on energy use — costs that will be borne by people, especially lower-income people, in every aspect of their lives.
The organizations, members of the National Consumer Coalition’s “Cooler Heads Coalition,” note the growing scientific uncertainties over whether global warming is occurring, and, if so, whether that reflects natural or anthropogenic factors. Yet, despite this uncertainty and with clear evidence of the economic and social harm resulting from the treaty, the Administration has made an end-run around the American public. “Cooler Heads” members argue that the signing of the Kyoto Protocol shows contempt for American citizens and the Constitution an effort to by-pass the safeguards against poorly considered treaties. This Administration has sought to alarm, rather than inform the American public, and has bombarded them with global warming myths based on fears rather than facts.
Here is what “Cooler Heads” members have to say:
60 Plus Association
“People, not politics, was the Presidents slogan prior to the November elections. It now appears politics, not people, prevails. Clearly, scientific data strongly countermands this Administrations political posturing on global warming. People will suffer, especially seniors living on fixed incomes, due to the exorbitantly higher energy costs triggered by this Administrations politics as usual catering to special interests.”
— Jim Martin, President
Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow
“The Kyoto Protocol is a bad deal, it’s based on bad science, and it would mean bad times for people not only in America, but throughout the rest of the world, as well. By signing this terrible treaty during the current United Nations conference in Buenos Aires, the Clinton Administration has once again shown that it would rather dance the tango with radical environmentalists than listen to the music of sound science, real-world economics, and the best interests of the American people.”
— David Rothbard, President
Competitive Enterprise Institute
“President Clintons signing of the Kyoto protocol will deliver a devastating blow to the economic and environmental interests of the world. A vibrant US economy offers the most secure path to a richer, cleaner, ecologically diverse planet. Imposing a poorly considered carbon withdrawal program on the US will harm the poor at home and abroad, and undermine Americas ability to address serious environmental and social needs.”
— Fred Smith, President
Consumer Alert
“The signing of the global arming treaty means that consumers will be left out in the cold they will bear the brunt of drastic cutbacks in energy use. It has become increasingly clear that the science supporting global warming is uncertain at best and misleading at worst. Yet, despite this uncertainty, the Administration is steering a straight course toward economic disaster for the American people severe restrictions on energy use; huge increases in prices for heating oil, transportation, electricity, food; and large drops in employment. Although Administration cheerleaders for the global warming treaty deny this consumer impact, even a recent Department of Energy analysis by the Energy Information Administration reinforces this somber assessment. The risks of global warming are speculative; the risks of global warming policies are all too real.”
— Frances B. Smith, Executive Director
Cooler Heads Coalition
“President Clinton’s signing of the Kyoto Protocol is unconscionable. There is no scientific justification for the Kyoto Protocol, the costs are potentially devastating, and the whole attempt to plan the worlds energy economy for the next 50-100 years is an exercise in futility, not to mention the height of arrogance. Furthermore, the Administration failed to achieve any of the diplomatic objectives they previously said were essential. Despite almost two weeks of negotiation, there has been no agreement among the parties to allow unrestricted emission trading among industrial countries, no agreement by developing countries to undertake voluntary commitments, no agreement even as to the meaning of meaningful participation. There is only one way Clinton can undo the damage he has done. He must submit the Protocol for a vote on ratification, so that the E.S. Senate, exercising its constitutional prerogatives of advice and consent, can give the Kyoto Protocol the burial it deserves.”
— Marlo Lewis, Chairman
Defenders of Property Rights
“President Clintons signing of the Kyoto Protocol is a threat to the property rights of all Americans, especially small business owners. Many small businesses will be forced to close their doors because of higher food and fuel prices. The lack of sound scientific evidence to support the Protocol, notably the lack of credible evidence linking greenhouse emissions and global climate changes, should be reason enough not to subject the American economy to such social tinkering. However, there is also a strong constitutional argument against the United States signing onto the agreement. Namely, the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution expressly forbids the federal government from engaging in actions that destroy property rights (in this case small businesses) without payment of just compensation.”
— Nancie G. Marzulla, President and Chief Legal Counsel
Pacific Research Institute
“President Clinton has committed an egregious act by signing the Kyoto Protocol. The severe rationing of energy use and production required to meet the terms of the international agreement will cripple the U.S. economy and mean enormous sacrifices from every family, business, and organization in the nation. Californians will be among the worst hit, given the states heavy reliance on oil and natural gas. Residents of the Golden State can expect to pay an additional $3 billion to $10 billion a year in higher energy bills. The Presidents claims that the agreements impact on American people will be minimal has been shot down by numerous economic reports, most recently by the U.S. Department of Energy which shows that the typical American household will pay an additional $335 to $1,740 a year in energy costs by the year 2010.”
— Dana Joel Gattuso, Director of Research
The Seniors Coalition
“The President, in defiance of the 95 – 0 sense of the Senate vote last year, has signed a treaty that will have a dire impact on America’s senior citizens. His own agencies have predicted the huge impact this treaty will have on gas and electrical prices. The President has misread the results of last weeks election if he thinks it was a mandate for him to run rough-shod over the American people. Over the past year, almost 20 thousand seniors have mailed petitions to the President urging him not to sign this treaty. By signing this ill-conceived treaty he chose to ignore the voice of seniors. The President has spoken repeatedly about putting progress before partisanship, but the fact is, the terms of the climate change Treaty do just the reverse, stymying American economic progress but furthering the cause of the year 2000 Presidential election partisanship. Mr. Clinton has exercised his prerogative as head of state to sign the Treaty and now he has a constitutional obligation to submit the Treaty to the Senate for ratification. We urge him to do so immediately.”
— Thair Phillips, CEO
Small Business Survival Committee
“The President’s shifty strategy that put off signing this controversial accord until after the elections is the perfect ending to a stealth process that kept most of the American public and the Congress in the dark regarding the science and economics used to justify Administration support of the treaty. In plain language, President Clinton just sold out the country. His callous disregard of the concerns of American workers, consumers and small businesses is tragic. This lopsided and phony environmental treaty remains a bad deal for America.”
— Karen Kerrigan, President
The National Center for Public Policy Research
“By signing the Kyoto Protocol, President Clinton demonstrated that he cares little about the needs of the nations most disadvantaged Americans. Should the treaty be ratified by the U.S. Senate, the United States would be required to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and thus its fossil fuel use by more than 30% — more than three times the emissions reduction that occurred as a result of the Great Depression. The economic consequences of such a cut would be severe: The U.S. would experience a loss in Gross Domestic Product of up to $300 billion per year and a loss of up to 2.4 million jobs. Prices for electricity and gasoline would soar. Tragically, such price increases would take their heaviest toll on the nations most economically disadvantaged people, predominantly African-Americans and Hispanics.”
— David Ridenour, Vice President