On the recordJune 13, 2019
I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama for yielding. I want to thank him for bringing this amendment up. Mr. Chairman, it is really important to make sure we understand what we are talking about here. The Paris accord was engaged in for the purpose of benefiting the global environment, for benefiting the global environment and for reducing emissions, yet what has happened under the agreement with the pledges that the nations have made is that the United States, over the last several years, has actually reduced our emissions by nearly a billion tons. China has actually increased theirs by 4 billion tons. This agreement is so disparate it doesn't make sense. The President was right to withdraw. But to distinguish, we can stay focused on the targets, the pledges, but we should not codify, memorialize, agree, or in anyway comply with this disparate approach where China can continue polluting the environment. Mr. Chairman, this is similar to a scenario where I get together with a group of friends and I say, hey, we are going to have a savings club, and we are all going to get together, and I am going put money into it, and they are going come and take money out. That is not a savings club. That is what is happening. This is not benefiting the environment. The United States should not participate, codify, or support this scenario where China is out there more than increasing by the emissions reductions that the United States is achieving.…





