- Raja, chairman of the Republican Committee of Allegheny County (RCAC) supports President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord and also the President’s decision to look out for “Pittsburgh, not Paris.”
According to Raja, “The Paris Accord is a BAD deal for Americans, and President Trump’s action to remove the U.S. from this giveaway to other countries is another example of him keeping his campaign promise to put American workers first. I am proud that our President is standing up for the people of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County.”
The Accord was poorly negotiated by the Obama Administration, signed in desperation by the President, and imposed on the American people without their consent.
President Obama did this because he knew he couldn’t get Senate approval because the Accord front-loads massive costs on the American people to the detriment of our economy and job growth while extracting meaningless commitments from the world’s top global emitters, like China.
The U.S. is already leading the world in energy production and environment-friendly technologies, and it doesn’t need a bad deal that will harm American workers.
Eileen Holste, resident of the City of Pittsburgh echoed the sentiments of fellow Pittsburghers: “We strongly disagree with Mayor Peduto’s claim that ‘Pittsburghers’ do not support President Trump’s action. Pittsburgh is still losing population because it is not business-friendly and therefore folks are moving elsewhere to find jobs. It is radical environmental policies like that Paris Accord that have contributed to Pittsburgh’s decline as a major metropolitan powerhouse.”
Val DiGiorgio, Chairman of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania agrees “I applaud President Trump for putting Americans first by rejecting a globalist climate deal that trades American sovereignty and jobs for almost no impact on our climate.” Undermines U.S. Competitiveness and Jobs
- According to a study by NERA Consulting, meeting the Obama Administration’s requirements in the Paris Accord would cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion over the next several decades.
- By 2040, our economy would lose 6.5 million industrial sector jobs – including 3.1 million manufacturing sector jobs
- It would effectively decapitate our coal industry, which now supplies about one-third of our electric power
- The deal was negotiated BADLY, and extracts meaningless commitments from the world’s top polluters
- The Obama-negotiated Accord imposes unrealistic targets on the U.S. for reducing our carbon emissions, while giving countries like China a free pass for years to come.
- Under the Accord, China will actually increase emissions until 2030
- The U.S. is ALREADY a Clean Energy and Oil & Gas Energy Leader; we can reduce our emissions and continue to produce American energy without the Paris Accord
- America has already reduced its carbon-dioxide emissions dramatically
- Since 2006, CO2 emissions have declined by 12 percent, and are expected to continue to decline
- According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. is the leader in oil & gas production
- The agreement funds a UN Climate Slush Fund underwritten by American taxpayers
- President Obama committed $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund – which is about 30 percent of the initial funding – without authorization from Congress
- With $20 trillion in debt, the U.S. taxpayers should not be paying to subsidize other countries’ energy needs
- The deal also accomplishes LITTLE for the climate
- According to researchers at MIT, if all member nations met their obligations, the impact on the climate would be negligible. The impacts have been estimated to be likely to reduce global temperature rise by less than .2 degrees Celsius in 2100.
The Negative Economic Impact of the Paris Accord
Energy is a key building block for economic opportunity. Carbon-dioxide-emitting fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, provided 87 percent of America’s energy needs in the past decade, and have been the overwhelming supplier for over a century. Restricting the use of conventional energy sources as laid out by the Obama Administration’s INDC will significantly harm the U.S. economy. Americans feel the pain of higher energy prices directly, but also indirectly through almost all of the goods and services they buy, because energy is a necessary component of production and service. Higher energy prices will disproportionately hurt the poorest Americans, who spend the highest percentage of their budget on energy bills. Companies will pass higher costs on to consumers or absorb the costs, which prevents hiring and new investment. As prices rise, consumers buy less, and companies will drop employees, close entirely, or move to other countries where the cost of doing business is lower. The result is fewer opportunities for American workers, lower incomes, less economic growth, and higher unemployment.