Search Form
First, enter a politician or zip code
Now, choose a category

Public Statements

Letter to The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton Secretary of State U.S. Department of State

Letter

By:
Date:
Location: Washington, DC

U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), ranking member of the Subcommittee on Oversight in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, strongly opposes the Obama administration's decision to transfer billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to developing nations in the name of climate change.

Today, Senator Barrasso, along with Senators James Inhofe (R-OK), David Vitter (R-LA) and George Voinovich (R-OH) sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton demanding that the administration freeze further spending requests to implement international climate change finance programs. Barrasso delivered the following statement about his letter:

"We have a $1.29 trillion deficit and are $13.6 trillion in debt. It makes no sense for the United States to now spend billions of taxpayer dollars to fight climate change in other countries. Americans are concerned about jobs, the economy, the debt and spending. If the administration is serious about listening to the American people, they will cancel this international climate change bailout."

Full Text of the letter:

December 2, 2010

The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Clinton:

As the sixteenth Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is set to enter its second week, we remain opposed to the U.S. commitment to full implementation of the Copenhagen Accord, which will transfer billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to developing nations in the name of climate change.

We understand that climate-related appropriations for 2010 totaled $1.3 billion, which is more than triple from 2009 levels at $315 million. The President also requested another sizeable increase of $1.9 billion for Fiscal Year 2011, as the Administration seeks to fund its share of this $100 billion global commitment by 2020. We do not believe that billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars should be transferred to developing countries through unaccountable multilateral or bilateral channels for adaptation, deforestation and other international climate finance programs.

In the November 2nd election, Americans clearly expressed their concerns about record deficit spending. The U.S. Treasury Department's Fiscal Year 2010 year-end report showed that the federal deficit hit $1.29 trillion, topping $1 trillion for the second straight year in a row. These deficits are in addition to our existing debt, which is currently at $13.6 trillion. We simply cannot afford any new massive spending programs with such debt owed by America's future generations.

Concern about deficits and spending stems in large part from the fact that millions of Americans are struggling to find employment. In October, the unemployment rate in the United States stood at 9.6 percent. As spending dramatically increases, Americans believe there is a connection between Washington profligacy and the ability of employers to create jobs.

In addition, several of the findings of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concerning the eventual impacts of climate change in developing countries were found to be exaggerated or simply not true. We understand that reforms of the IPCC process are currently underway and we believe that no American taxpayer dollars should be committed to a global climate fund based on information that is not accurate.

In light of the federal government's dire financial situation and the poor state of the economy, in addition to ongoing reviews at the IPCC, we request that the Administration freeze further spending requests to implement international climate change finance programs. This would include making no additional international commitments to fund such programs.


Source:
Skip to top
Back to top