Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

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

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



 
                         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. Engel, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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 Foreign Affairs, 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
Report...........................................................     1
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Hearing..........................................................     5
Committee Consideration..........................................     6
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................     7
New Budget Authority, Tax Expenditures, and Federal Mandates.....     7
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................     8
Non-Duplication of Federal Programs..............................     9
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................     9
Congressional Accountability Act.................................     9
New Advisory Committees..........................................     9
Earmark Identification...........................................     9
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................     9
Dissenting Views.................................................    11

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    The purpose of H.R. 9 is to direct the President to develop 
a plan for the United States to meet its nationally determined 
contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement (PA). The bill 
prohibits the use of funds to advance the withdrawal by the 
United States from the Agreement. It also requires the 
President to submit to the appropriate congressional Committees 
and make public a plan for the United States to meet its 
nationally determined contribution under the Paris Agreement to 
Congress 120 days after enactment. Finally, H.R. 9 requires the 
President to file with Congress and make public annual updates 
to the plan.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Climate change presents significant national and 
international security threats to the United States in the near 
term, and increasingly insurmountable threats to security 
interests of the United States as the impacts of climate change 
worsen.
    In 2003, the Pentagon commissioned a report to examine how 
an abrupt change in climate would affect our defense 
capabilities. Its authors concluded that it ``should be 
elevated beyond a scientific debate to a U.S. national security 
concern.''
    More recently, in 2012 and 2014, Department of Defense 
Climate Change Adaptation Roadmaps stated that climate change 
can serve as ``an accelerant of instability or conflict'' that 
could have significant geopolitical impacts contributing to 
``poverty, environmental degradation, the weakening of fragile 
governments and food and water scarcity.''
    In December 2017, Congress passed, and the President signed 
into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2018, which states in Section 335(b) that ``climate change is a 
direct threat to the national security of the United States.''
    In January 2019, the Director of National Intelligence 
delivered a worldwide threat assessment that ``climate 
hazards'' including extreme weather, wildfires, droughts and 
acidifying oceans are worsening, ``threatening infrastructure, 
health, and water and food security.''
    In March 2019, in response to the President's reported 
plans to establish a commission to dispute military and 
intelligence judgments on the threats posed by climate change, 
58 former senior military and national security officials 
signed a letter to the President warning him that ``[i]mposing 
a political test on reports issued by the science agencies, and 
forcing a blind spot onto the national security assessments 
that depend on them, will erode our national security.''
    When we face pressing and intensifying global security 
threats like climate change, the United States is strongest 
when we work shoulder-to-shoulder with our friends and partners 
around the world.
    The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 
(UNFCCC) and the 2015 Paris Agreement are at the core of 
international climate change cooperation.
    The United States ratified the UNFCCC, with the advice and 
consent of the Senate, in October 1992 (U.S. Treaty No. 102-
38). 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.''
    According 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, in 
accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, 
stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the 
atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous 
anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a 
level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to 
allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to 
ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable 
economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.''
    On December 12, 2015, in Paris, the Parties to the UNFCCC 
reached a landmark agreement designed to combat climate change 
by accelerating and intensifying the actions needed to 
strengthen the global response. A key goal of the Paris 
Agreement--which was adopted under, and which is intended to 
enhance the implementation of, the UNFCCC--is to hold the 
increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 
degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts 
to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
    At present, almost 200 Parties have signed the PA.
    The PA contains several procedural requirements, including 
the submission of a non-legally binding ``nationally determined 
contribution'' to be regularly updated. NDCs set forth each 
Party's intended emissions reduction targets and other 
mitigation measures.
    The U.S. nationally determined contribution is a reduction 
of its greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below a 
2005 baseline in 2025.
    The PA also includes a robust transparency system, which 
involves reporting and review regarding Parties' inventories of 
greenhouse gas emissions, as well as their progress toward the 
implementation and achievement of NDCs. The details of this 
transparency system were agreed to by all parties during the 
December 2018 Conference of the Parties (COP) meeting in 
Katowice, Poland--creating a landmark accountability mechanism 
applicable to all parties. At the time, the State Department 
noted that, ``[t]he outcome took a significant step toward 
holding our economic competitors accountable for reporting 
their emissions in a manner consistent with standards the 
United States has met since the early 1990's.''
    Finally, in terms of legal character, the Agreement 
contains a mixture of legally binding and non-legally binding 
provisions. The NDCs themselves are not legally binding, which 
means that there is no legal obligation to achieve the 
emissions targets or other mitigation measures therein. 
However, various other aspects of the Agreement are legally 
binding, including the obligations to submit and update NDCs, 
as well as report and be reviewed on emissions inventories and 
progress made in implementing and achieving NDCs.
    On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced his intention to 
withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement. Under the 
terms of the PA, the withdrawal process cannot be initiated 
until November 4, 2019, with effect on November 4, 2020 at the 
earliest.
    This legislation would ensure the United States remains a 
party to the PA--an agreement supported by every other country 
in the world.
    The United States was once a global leader in pushing for 
climate action, but the current Administration has largely 
abandoned these efforts. As a result, our progress in reducing 
emissions has dwindled and is now reversing itself. The 
Environmental Protection Agency's latest data shows that 
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions fell to just half a 
percent in 2017. And according to the International Energy 
Agency, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions actually rose by 3.1 
percent in 2018.
    At a time when the world desperately needs to decrease 
emissions, ours are increasing. During a year in which more 
dirty coal plants closed than almost any other in history, our 
emissions surged. That means vast declines in coal use were not 
enough to offset the other harms caused by this 
Administration's policies--like its efforts to repeal the Clean 
Power Plan, roll back vehicle emission standards, rescind 
methane-flaring rules, weaken emission standards for brick and 
tile manufacturers, withdraw a proposed rule reducing air 
pollutants at sewage treatment plants, reverse a policy that 
limits hazardous pollution from industrial sources, disband the 
Particulate Matter Review Panel, end NASA's carbon monitoring 
system, and yes, its announced intent to withdraw from the PA.
    Some argue that the U.S is not a party to the PA because 
the PA was never approved by the Senate. Not only is this 
incorrect as a matter of international law, but it is incorrect 
as a matter of U.S. law. The previous President had authority 
to enter into the PA derived from the Constitution, the Senate-
approved United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 
and domestic law. The vast majority of international agreements 
entered into by the U.S. are not approved by the Senate. 
Furthermore, none of the four witnesses at our April 2 hearing 
expressed any opinion in oral or written testimony about 
whether the PA should have been submitted to the Senate for 
ratification.
    Some also argue that we should not further reduce emissions 
without more aggressive action from China and India. But China 
and India recognize both the problems and opportunities 
presented by climate change, and are taking action. And, if no 
country acts until every other country acts, no progress would 
ever be made.
    The Chinese government acknowledged in its most recent 
comprehensive assessment of climate change that it is already 
affected by worsening floods, more extreme droughts, diminished 
fishery productivity and other ecological changes. It 
recognizes that a warming climate will threaten the country's 
agricultural production, make economically important cities 
vulnerable to flooding and eventually dry out many of the 
country's rivers.
    Under the PA, China committed to leveling off its carbon 
emissions around 2030, reducing carbon emissions per unit of 
gross domestic product (GDP) by 60 to 65 percent from 2005 
levels by 2030, and increasing the non-fossil share of its 
primary energy to 20 percent. Beijing is moving aggressively to 
reduce emissions and deploy clean energy technologies. Despite 
being the world's largest greenhouse gas emitter since 2005, 
China has created the world's largest carbon market, invested 
approximately three times as much money into renewables as the 
United States, and surpassed the United States in terms of both 
the number of electric vehicles on the road and the number of 
publicly available charging stations. According to one 
independent study, China's emissions may have already peaked.
    China is also embracing the nexus between climate and 
security. In 2017, China signed a joint statement with the 
European Union terming rising global temperatures ``a root 
cause of instability.''
    On the world stage, the Trump administration's anticipated 
withdrawal from the Paris Agreement has created a global 
leadership void that China has been keen to exploit.
    Given its huge population and levels of inequality and 
poverty, India stands to be one of the nations most 
significantly affected by climate change. The IPCC report from 
October 2018 says that the impact of a 1.5 degrees Celsius 
increase in global temperatures will ``disproportionately 
affect disadvantaged and vulnerable populations through food 
insecurity, higher food prices, income losses, lost livelihood 
opportunities, adverse health impacts, and population 
displacements.''
    Under the PA, India pledged to cut greenhouse gas intensity 
by 30 to 35 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. By the same 
deadline, India intends to generate 40 percent of its power 
capacity from non-fossil fuel sources.
    To meet these targets, India is investing heavily in solar 
energy. In 2018, for the first time ever, new installations of 
power using solar cells exceeded all other types of power, and 
the country emerged as the world's third-largest solar power 
market in 2018--surpassing Germany and Japan.
    Using China and India as justifications for inaction risks 
ceding global leadership and unrivaled economic opportunity on 
this issue. It is indisputable that the whole world needs to do 
more if we are to be spared from the worst impacts of climate 
change, and the PA presents businesses and investors with an 
historic opportunity by signaling a new global consensus that 
the transition to a clean energy economy is underway.
    It takes courage to experiment with new ways of doing 
things, and to leave old habits behind. The United States has 
always led on big global challenges, and now we must seize on 
commitments from around the world and apply the unmatched 
strength and ingenuity of the American government and private 
sector to the problem of combating climate change.

                                HEARING

    On April 2, 2019, the Full Committee held a hearing 
entitled ``How Climate Change Threatens U.S. National 
Security''. Witnesses included Vice Admiral Dennis V. McGinn, 
USN (Ret), Former Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Energy, 
Installations and Environment; The Honorable Sherri Goodman, 
Former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Environmental 
Security; Mr. Paul Weisenfeld, Former Assistant to the 
Administrator for the Bureau for Food Security, U.S. Agency for 
International Development; Mr. Barry K. Worthington, Executive 
Director, United States Energy Association. This hearing was 
used to consider H.R. 9.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    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. On 
April 9, 2019, the Committee marked up H.R. 9 pursuant to 
notice, in open session. The Committee advises that there were 
6 record votes taken on H.R. 9, including a motion by Mr. Engel 
ordering H.R. 9 favorably reported to the House. The motion on 
final passage of the bill was approved by a record vote of 24 
ayes and 16 noes. The following are the record votes taken 
during Committee consideration, including the names of those 
members voting for and against:
    Amendment: An amendment in the nature of a substitute, 
offered by Mr. McCaul, which includes new findings, requires 
the President to include a cost-benefit analysis in his plan to 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, requires the President to 
notify Congress prior to submitting a new NDC on behalf of the 
U.S. along with certain information about the impact of the 
NDC, and removes the requirement that the United States honor 
its commitments under the PA.
    Disposition: NOT AGREED TO by a roll call vote of 16 ayes 
and 21 noes.

        Voting aye: McCaul, Chabot, Wilson, Perry, Yoho, 
Kinzinger, Zeldin, Wagner, Mast, Curtis, Wright, Reschenthaler, 
Burchett, Pence, Watkins, and Guest.
        Voting no: Engel, Sires, Connolly, Deutch, Keating, 
Cicilline, Bera, Espaillat, Lieu, Wild, Phillips, Omar, Allred, 
Levin, Spanberger, Houlahan, Malinowski, Trone, Costa, Vargas, 
and Gonzalez.

    Amendment: An amendment offered by Mr. Curtis, requiring 
the President's plan to describe how the U.S. NDC compares to 
the NDCs of other nations.
    Disposition: NOT AGREED TO by a roll call vote of 17 ayes 
and 22 noes.

        Voting aye: McCaul, Smith, Chabot, Wilson, Perry, Yoho, 
Kinzinger, Zeldin, Wagner, Mast, Curtis, Wright, Reschenthaler, 
Burchett, Pence, Watkins, and Guest.
        Voting no: Engel, Meeks, Sires, Connolly, Deutch, Bass, 
Keating, Bera, Castro, Espaillat, Lieu, Wild, Phillips, Allred, 
Levin, Spanberger, Houlahan, Malinowski, Trone, Costa, Vargas, 
and Gonzalez.

    Amendment: An amendment offered by Mr. Wright, which delays 
the effective date of the bill until the Secretary of State 
certifies that China and Russia have each committed to 
emissions reductions that are equivalent to those of the United 
States.
    Disposition: NOT AGREED TO by a roll call vote of 16 ayes 
and 23 noes.

        Voting aye: McCaul, Chabot, Wilson, Perry, Yoho, 
Kinzinger, Zeldin, Wagner, Mast, Curtis, Buck, Wright, 
Burchett, Pence, Watkins, and Guest.
        Voting no: Engel, Meeks, Sires, Connolly, Deutch, Bass, 
Keating, Cicilline, Bera, Castro, Espaillat, Lieu, Wild, 
Phillips, Allred, Levin, Spanberger, Houlahan, Malinowski, 
Trone, Costa, Vargas, and Gonzalez.

    Motion: A motion to table Mr. Buck's appeal of the ruling 
of the chair that his amendment was not germane.
    Disposition: Motion to table AGREED TO by a roll call vote 
of 23 ayes and 17 noes.
        Voting aye: Engel, Meeks, Sires, Connolly, Deutch, 
Keating, Cicilline, Bera, Castro, Titus, Espaillat, Lieu, Wild, 
Phillips, Allred, Levin, Spanberger, Houlahan, Malinowski, 
Trone, Costa, Vargas, and Gonzalez.
        Voting no: McCaul, Smith, Chabot, Wilson, Perry, Yoho, 
Kinzinger, Zeldin, Wagner, Mast, Curtis, Buck, Wright, 
Burchett, Pence, Watkins, and Guest.

    Amendment: An amendment offered by Mr. Zeldin, which delays 
the effective date of the bill until the Senate approves the 
Paris Agreement.
    Disposition: NOT AGREED TO by a roll call vote of 17 ayes 
and 24 noes.

        Voting aye: McCaul, Smith, Chabot, Wilson, Perry, Yoho, 
Kinzinger, Zeldin, Wagner, Mast, Curtis, Buck, Wright, 
Burchett, Pence, Watkins, and Guest.
        Voting no: Engel, Sharman, Meeks, Sires, Connolly, 
Deutch, Keating, Cicilline, Bera, Castro, Titus, Espaillat, 
Lieu, Wild, Phillips, Allred, Levin, Spanberger, Houlahan, 
Malinowski, Trone, Costa, Vargas, and Gonzalez.

    Motion: A motion by Mr. Engel to order H.R. 9 favorably 
reported to the House (final passage).
    Disposition: AGREED TO by a roll call vote of 24 ayes and 
16 noes.

        Voting aye: Engel, Sherman, Meeks, Sires, Connolly, 
Deutch, Keating, Cicilline, Bera, Castro, Titus, Espaillat, 
Lieu, Wild, Phillips, Allred, Levin, Spanberger, Houlahan, 
Malinowski, Trone, Costa, Vargas, and Gonzalez.
        Voting no: McCaul, Chabot, Wilson, Perry, Yoho, 
Kinzinger, Zeldin, Wagner, Mast, Curtis, Buck, Wright, 
Burchett, Pence, Watkins, and Guest.

                      COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the committee reports that 
findings and recommendations of the committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of House Rule X, are 
incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report, 
particularly in the `Background and Need for Legislation' 
section.

      NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY, TAX EXPENDITURES, AND FEDERAL MANDATES

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII and 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (P.L. 104-4), the committee 
adopts as its own the estimate of new budget authority, 
entitlement authority, tax expenditure or revenues, and Federal 
mandates 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 COST ESTIMATE

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 15, 2019.
Hon. Eliot Engel,
Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs,
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.
    Enclosure.

    cc: Honorable Michael McCaul.
    Ranking Member.

    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\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \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 Novemember 2019 and the earliest that withdrawal 
may take effect is one year after that notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    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.

                  NON-DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House Rule XIII, the 
committee States that no provision of this resolution 
establishes or reauthorizes a program of the Federal Government 
known to be duplicative of another Federal program, a program 
that was included in any report from the Government 
Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of 
Public Law 111-139, or a program related to a program 
identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance.

                    PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    The purpose of H.R. 9 is to direct the President to develop 
a plan for the United States to meet its nationally determined 
contribution under the Paris Agreement. The bill prohibits the 
use of funds to advance the withdrawal by the United States 
from the Agreement. It also requires the President to submit to 
the appropriate congressional Committees and make public a plan 
for the United States to meet its nationally determined 
contribution under the Paris Agreement to Congress 120 days 
after enactment. Finally, H.R. 9 requires the President to file 
with Congress and make public annual updates to the plan.

                    CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

    H.R. 9 does not apply to terms and conditions of employment 
or to access to public services or accommodations within the 
legislative branch.

                        NEW ADVISORY COMMITTEES

    H.R. 9 does not establish or authorize any new advisory 
committees.

                         EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

    H.R. 9 contains no congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as described in clauses 
9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of House Rule XXI.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

    Section 1. Short Title. This Act may be cited as the 
``Climate Action Now Act.''
    Section 2. Findings. This section establishes that in 
Paris, on December 12, 2105, parties to the UNFCCC reached a 
landmark agreement designed to combat climate change by 
accelerating and intensifying the actions needed to strengthen 
the global response. The PA contains several procedural 
requirements, including the submission of a non-legally binding 
``nationally determined contribution,'' to be regularly 
updated. The U.S. nationally determined contribution is a 
reduction of its greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent 
below a 2005 baseline in 2025. On June 1, 2017, President Trump 
announced his intention to withdraw the United States from the 
Paris Agreement. Under the terms of the PA, the withdrawal 
process cannot be initiated until November 4, 2019, with effect 
on November 4, 2020 at the earliest.
    Section 3. This section prohibits the use of funds to 
advance the withdrawal by the United States from the Paris 
Agreement.
    Section 4. This section requires the President to submit to 
the appropriate congressional
    Committees and make public a plan for the United States to 
meet its initial nationally determined contribution under the 
Paris Agreement to Congress 120 days after enactment. In its 
initial NDC, the United States committed to reducing greenhouse 
gas emissions 26-28 percent below 2005 levels in 2025. This 
section also requires the President to file with Congress and 
make public annual updates to the plan.
    Section 5. Definitions. This section defines the term 
``Paris Agreement.''

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    H.R. 9, the Climate Action Now Act, misses an opportunity 
to advance bipartisan solutions to address climate change. 
Instead, the bill doubles down on commitments made unilaterally 
by President Obama under the Paris Agreement to reduce United 
States greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions years before China--the 
world's largest GHG emitter--even begins to reduce emissions 
under its own Paris commitments.
    The Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework 
Convention on Climate Change entered into force in 2016. 
President Obama signed an instrument of acceptance of the 
agreement on behalf of the United States without any role for 
Congress. The President opted not to submit the agreement as a 
treaty to the Senate for ratification, much less consult 
Congress prior to submitting the U.S. nationally determined 
contribution (NDC) to reduce domestic greenhouse gas emissions 
by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, which H.R. 9 
attempts to codify into domestic law. According to an 
analysis\1\ by the World Resources Institute of the top 100 
greenhouse gas emitters, the United States is just one of 
twelve countries to adopt the Paris Agreement through 
unilateral action by the President, without any role for the 
legislature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.wri.org/publication/domestic-processes-joining-
paris-agreement
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At a hearing Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on April 2, 
2019, entitled How Climate Change Threatens U.S. National 
Security, witnesses and Members representing both political 
parties shared a common view of the threat climate change poses 
to the United States and the importance of technology and 
innovation to addressing the challenge. Unfortunately, H.R. 9 
does nothing to bolster research or promote innovation. In 
fact, Democrats on the Foreign Affairs Committee voted 
unanimously against an amendment to the bill that stated, 
United States Government actions taken to address the challenge 
of climate change should enjoy broad, bipartisan support, 
including policies that promote private sector-led innovation 
and technological advancement. Democrats on the committee also 
voted down an amendment calling for the Senate to approve a 
resolution of advice and consent to ratification of the Paris 
Agreement, despite the fact that all four witnesses at the 
April 2nd hearing--including threewitnesses invited by the 
Democrat majority--expressed agreement that President Obama 
should have submitted the Agreement to the Senate for 
ratification.
    President Obama's GHG pledge was submitted on behalf of the 
United States without any economic justification or cost-
benefit analysis. The private sector was also not consulted 
before the NDC was submitted to the United Nations. 
Accordingly, Congress only has third party analyses to rely on, 
one of which found that America's NDC could cost up to 2.7 
million jobs and $250 billion in gross domestic product by 
2025.\2\ This is why Republicans on the Foreign Affairs 
Committee supported an amendment to H.R. 9 which would require 
the President to notify Congress before submitting any future 
NDCs, including with information such as an economic analysis, 
an evaluation of the impact of the NDC on U.S. economic 
competitiveness and national security interests, how it will 
impact world energy markets, and what the NDC will mean for 
U.S. international efforts to alleviate energy poverty. 
Democrats unfortunately rejected this approach, preferring to 
stick with a commitment that cannot be justified economically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\https://www.nera.com/content/dam.nera/publications/2017/170316-
NERA-ACCF-Full-Report.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced his intent to 
withdraw the United States from the agreement but begin 
negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord or a really 
entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United 
States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its 
taxpayers.\3\ Whether the United States remains a party to the 
Paris Agreement or not, Republicans agree that addressing 
climate change requires an international effort, which the 
United States should lead as a role model for other countries. 
The United States Energy Information Administration estimates 
that United States energy-related carbon dioxide emissions 
declined by 14 percent from 2005 to 2017, starting well before 
the United States became a party to the Paris Agreement. This 
impressive decline brought greenhouse gas emissions to their 
lowest levels since 1992.\4\ A Republican-sponsored substitute 
amendment to H.R. 9 would have required regular briefings to 
Congress by the President on the status of any international 
negotiations to address climate change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-
president-trump-paris-climate-accord/
    \4\https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=36953
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    America's impressive record of reducing GHG emissions 
contrasts starkly with China and India, the world's largest and 
third largest emitters, respectively, which plan to continue 
increasing their emissions until 2030 under their commitments 
pursuant to the Paris Agreement. Russia, the fourth largest 
emitter, has not even ratified the Paris Agreement.


[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 



    Instead of doubling down on a pledge that Congress had no 
role in setting, that will have an unknown--and potentially 
catastrophic--impact on the U.S. economy, and which will do 
nothing to address China's (and other countries') growing 
emissions, Republicans believe that Congress should work on 
bipartisan legislation to boost research, advance technologies, 
promote innovation, and develop real solutions to climate 
change. The Climate Action Now Act falls short in all of these 
categories.

                                   MICHAEL T. McCAUL,
                                           Ranking Member,
                                           House Committee on Foreign 
                                               Affairs.

                                  [all]