Mr. INHOFE. No, I will not. You can't find any of the studies that are out there that haven't somehow talked about the fact that it is going to do economic damage. We know it is. No one can possibly say that there is a way to approach this where it is not [Page: S6112] going to cause the economy to be damaged. So that was in the Byrd-Hagel amendment. The Byrd-Hagel amendment also said we don't want to ratify anything. We are not going to ratify anything. Every Senator said: We are not going to ratify anything that does not require that the developing nations do the same thing that the developed nations do. Obviously, we have not seen one plan that has come along that addresses the cap and trade and greenhouse gas, anthropogenic gas emissions, that doesn't inflict damage that the developing nations are willing to do.
IPCC was not written by politicians. I never said the report was. I said the summary for policymakers was written by politicians.
Sea level rise is not going backward. All I can say is, if you are going to hang all your hopes on the IPCC, look at the report. This was this year, 2007. I have said this several times. I don't know why I have to keep repeating it. Yes, it has been cut in half, their estimate as to how much sea level rise was going to take place. This isn't the first time that has happened. This happens almost every time they have it in one of the reports. So the sea level rise, no sense repeating that.
Inhofe shouldn't distort. He is the only one I know of who says Chirac speaks for America. Chirac speaks for America--ye gods. Since he accused me of saying that this is some kind of a global conspiracy, I was quoting the person who said that, who I am sure is a much better friend of the Senator from Massachusetts than he is of mine, and that was Jacques Chirac. Jacques Chirac said:
Kyoto represents the first component of an authentic global governance.
That is not me. That is Jack Chirac. It answers the question why are these countries over in Europe so interested that we do something in this country that is going to hurt our economy. The answer came from Margot Wallstrom, Minister of the Environment for the European Union. She said:
Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big business worldwide.
Yes, there are other countries that would love to have America be overtaxed and have all these economic problems that we don't have right now. It could inure to their benefit; there is no question about that. No one would deny that.
Best economists don't say controlling carbon will be costly. How many economists and how many scientists do I have to quote? I could use the rest of my time and not repeat one of the scientists, read another whole list, but I have done it so many times. Here are some I haven't talked about. This is the cost.
Going back, if you want to catch 60 at one time, let's take the 60 scientists in Canada, the ones I said earlier were the ones who recommended to the Prime Minister, 15 years ago, that they sign onto, ratify the Kyoto treaty. Now they say:
If back in the mid-1990s we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist because we would have to conclude that it was not necessary.
That is 60 scientists there. You can try to discredit all 60 of them at one time and maybe you can do it. I don't know. But there are others. You can't look at these guys with the qualifications they have. Read what they have said. The fact that they have reversed their positions and say the scientists are not, there is some consensus because there is no consensus.
Senator Kerry quoted the Stern report, which has been discredited by even the economists who are climate change believers. I guess he was saying that I said there is a
group of industries and we had a hearing on this. I wish the Senator from Massachusetts had attended the hearing. Yes, it is true there are several large corporations in America that are now embracing any kind of reduction, cap and trade or a tax or anything else because it inures to their benefit. I was specific as to how many millions and how many billions of dollars each one of these corporations would have. How dare me say that.
Again, if I were on the board of directors of any of these, I would say: Let's do the same thing. The whole idea is to make money. The problem is, it is as if no one is paying for all this fun we are having. Yes, it would have to be more money. But if we did that, somebody has to pay for it. Again, even the CBO says that all this money it is going to cost, the tax increase on the American people, whichever of these schemes we decide on, is going to be disproportionately on the poor and those who are on fixed incomes.
By the way, one of the statements on here was that no one has said we were going to have a worse hurricane season. I will quote one person I think the junior Senator from Massachusetts would know. It is Teresa Heinz-Kerry. Teresa Heinz-Kerry, the chair of the Heinz Foundation, has helped financially bankroll the Environment2004 campaign coalition, which is placing billboards throughout Florida claiming ``President Bush's environmental policies could result in stronger and more frequent hurricanes.'' That is a quote.
I don't know how much time we have left. We are now repeating each other. Nothing new has come out. I will have maybe a short final statement. I am willing to yield back the balance of my time.
I ask unanimous consent at this point, while we are both resting, that Senator Warner be recognized for up to 4 minutes to make a statement as in morning business and that those 4 minutes be equally charged to both sides.
