What do you think of the government's position on climate change?

Question

what do you think they should do, where they're not putting enough money, what they're doing well/not enough, what would you blame them for....

Answer 1

they try to stop it but there just useless

Answer 2

I'd rather see them spend the money on a $500 dollar toilet seat, than to invest my tax dollars in an issue as blatantly false as this one.

Answer 3

The US gov't position has not changed since 1997.  It is called the "Gore" standard.  Al Gore, that is.

Unlike other countries that make and break treaties and promises without a problem, a treaty ratified by the US Senate has force of law the same as our Constitution.  That is why the US doesn't casually enter into treaties, because we would be bound to actually keep our promises.

The Byrd-Hagel Resolution (SRes 98) passed on July 25, 1997 by a margin of 95-0 stated that the U.S. Senate will not ratify any treaty signed at Kyoto that:

Would impose binding limits on the industrialized nations but not on developing nations within the same compliance period.

"Would result in serious economic harm to the economy of the United States."

That is our political process, for better or worse.

For a video of Al Gore explaining this resolution, go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho0Lda-i3...

Any questions?

Answer 4

Here is a question for you,

  The US has proven reserves in Alaska, off the California coast, in the gulf are off Florida and off the coasts of Virginia and North Carolina. We let special interest groups prohibit us from getting this oil and stopping our dependence OPEC, Mexico, and Venezuela. Why?

   Because all the Eco-freaks feel it is getter for us to pay $4.00 a gallon pollute the oceans with carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide from mega tankers bringing oil to the US. They force these alternate energy bills through congress on us instead of seeing some red tailed nit-rat moved or their condo view spoiled by a temporary drilling rig. The US can become energy self sufficient in less than two years if we let the oil companies do their job. I hate to pay $4.00 a gallon for gas, who do you think will pay the oil companies taxes? The consumer of course, just like we pay their taxes now. Sure it cuts into their profit margin a little, but in the end the biggest company that get the most profit from a gallon of gas is the congress (Right now about 50 cents a gallon) and they spend that on bridges to nowhere.

   Maybe Congress does not want us to drill in the United States they keep the groups who finance their campaigns. All those big powerful Eco lobbies and foreign oil companies that pay them a lot of cash to back them have a bigger say than the voting citizens’ who don’t write their congressman telling them to open up these reserves.

   Alterative energy, Why don’t you look back to the 1970’s and see how much a gallon of gas jumped the last time congress thought they knew how to run a business.

  Congress is at a 20% approval rating lower than even Prez Bush. The reason why is because they are letting these Eco-freaks try to limit big business in the name of climate change. They also don’t see a reason why you should not be happy paying $4.00 a gallon for gas just so some farmer can get a kickback growing corn for ethanol.

   Climate Change is a big softball for congress to play with, except in the end it hurts the US citizen in the pocket book and at the dinner table.

Answer 5

Gore invented global warming right after he invented the internet. Global warming, is natural. The earth goes through a cold period, followed by a warm period every million years or whatever, hence the ice age and the extreme heat in the years of dinosaurs. In addition, the earth slows down one extra second every millenium, causing us to rotate around the sun longer and a slight warming. It's not us, it's natural.

Answer 6

Since global warming threatens national security (greater than terrorism according to a Pentagon report), whoever allowed ExxonMobil to craft our country's energy policy should be on trial for treason.

Exxposing ExxonMobil's Agenda: Manipulating Politics and the Public

http://www.exxposeexxon.com/facts/dailyf...

Bush's record is pathetic, starting with when he went back on nis campaign promise to reduce carbon pollution:

http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/airenergy...

Bush admits humans cause global warming, but rebuffs action (07/06/05)

EPA scuttled global warming videos to avoid White House wrath (07/01/05)

White House white-washes global warming data (06/08/05)

Bush points to technology as key to climate change fix (02/17/05)

EPA environmental report to include global warming data (02/03/05)

Bush administration impedes progress at international global warming talks (12/18/04)

Bush administration accepts global warming science but balks at solutions (11/24/04)

Bush administration agrees to capture methane gas (11/16/04)

Bush administration ignoring scientific evidence on global warming (11/08/04)

Top EPA air official tells industries it will need to reduce greenhouse gases (10/12/04)

Bush administration slashes funding for global warming research (06/03/04)

EPA will cover climate change, for a change (06/02/04)

Bush administration claims it's misunderstood on global warming (05/10/04)

Secret Pentagon report details global warming threat (02/22/04)

Scientists accuse White House of distorting science for political gains (02/18/04)

Energy Department promoting carbon sequestration (01/27/04)

Court upholds stronger energy-efficiency standards (01/13/04)

Bush's global warming plan produces negligible results (01/01/04)

EPA revs up motorcycle pollution plan (12/23/03)

Bush administration seeks increase in use of ozone-depleting pesticide (11/14/03)

White House plays down global warming evidence (09/21/03)

EPA passes the buck on regulating global warming pollution from cars (08/28/03)

EPA on global warming gases: Bring 'em on! (08/28/03)

Bush climate plan all study, no action (07/24/03)

White House whitewashes EPA environment report (06/23/03)

Department of Agriculture encouraging farmers to cut greenhouse gas (06/06/03)

Bush administration to build world's first emission-free power plant (02/27/03)

Scientists debunk Bush's global warming plan (02/25/03)

White House ordered to reveal climate change documents (02/21/03)

White House gets industry support for voluntary pollution cuts (02/12/03)

Bush administration fosters policy of delay on global warming (12/04/02)

EPA omits global warming section from pollution report (09/15/02)

Bush administration stalls on global warming solution (07/10/02)

Bush and Whitman distance themselves from EPA global warming report (06/12/02)

Bush administration finally admits big trouble from global warming (06/03/02)

Bush administration ousts top global warming scientist (04/19/02)

Bush clean air plan would boost coal use (04/17/02)

Bush administration trying to dump global warming scientist (04/02/02)

White House global warming plan "cooks the books" (02/14/02)

Bush unlikely to offer alternative global warming plan (07/26/01)

NRDC praises global warming agreement; calls on Bush to reconsider (07/23/01)

Bush outlines an 'all talk, no action' approach to global warming (07/13/01)

Bush budget cuts for international global warming programs more significant than reported (07/12/01)

NRDC to President Bush: Get serious about global warming (06/11/01)

Bush administration rejects Kyoto Protocol (03/28/01)

Bush retreats from campaign promise to reduce carbon pollution (03/13/01)

We need to fire the politicians who failed to act, implement severe campaign financing reform, implement conservation efforts and market incentives, halt construction of future coal power plants, and fund research on technologies such as carbon sequestration.

Answer 7

They will do nothing. Every body know that the source of the problem is the fuel consumed that dirts the air and makes it warmer. There's too much money in the fuel market that they have to choose between economy and environment. Unfortunately money is more important than environment for the governments. They have nothing to do with that and nothing will change.

Answer 8

There's nothing wrong with our climate. Governments want you to believe that to get more money for useless environmental programs. When did a government solved a problem?

They're going to enforce a carbon credit market that will strangle the small industries and benefit the big corporations. Meanwhile, the traders are going to get a cut everyday.

With small industries out of the way, unemployment, cheap labor... you can imagine the whole picture.

Answer 9

Now anyone answering might be discussing a different government.

Our province is retrofitting some old Candu nuclear power plants to prevent having us use so much coal power, and plans to build a couple more nuclear power plants for the same reason. THey are however not planning them large enough to provide for  electrical transportation demand, and are planning to have us all stop using electricity to heat, homes or water.

In general, they are assuming we will continue to use fossil fuels at home for those things.

We will not be making progress toward getting off fossil fuel completely.

Yes, they are making plans to buy wind, solar, or biomass electrical power, but they do not plan to  have a significant part of our energy from those sources. Our expected consumption of fossil fuels continues to rise for the next 40 years.

Answer 10

I think most politicians love the idea as it is a perfect excuse to collect more tax revenues for their ultimate control.

Answer 11

The Bush season,

Blaa