On the recordJuly 13, 2022
I am somewhat baffled by this amendment. Why would we, for any reason, decide that we are just going to look at climate resiliency? Mr. Speaker, we have had hurricanes, we have had floods, we have had forest fires, we have had tornadoes, winter storms, earthquakes, tsunamis since the planet has been here. Why would we decide that we are just going to compartmentalize climate resilience and just look at that and ignore everything else? Why would we decide that we are going to choose to bias only frontline communities versus those that are truly most vulnerable? This is what I used to do for a living. I did it for years and years. I am glad this is comical. This is what I used to do. This might be the stupidest thing I have ever seen. Why in the world, Mr. Speaker, would you compartmentalize different types of vulnerability? If you are concerned about climate, why don't you go and talk to this administration about the fact that under President Trump, emissions went down 2.5 percent a year, and under President Biden, they have gone up 6.3 percent a year. And we negotiated an agreement with China where they get to increase emissions 150 percent while everybody else cuts. This is simply just ill-informed. It doesn't make any sense at all, and I urge rejection of this ill-conceived amendment.





