Obama administration officials are planning to fan out across Washington all week to play up a climate change deal the president helped secure in Paris over the weekend, although critics on both sides say the deal represents nothing more than a “paper tiger.”
“Just like each one before it, this climate agreement is unenforceable, underfunded and nonbinding. There is nothing historic about this deal,” said Thomas Pyle, president of the free-market group American Energy Alliance. “The Obama administration clearly doesn’t have the support of Congress or the American people — making the agreement nothing more than a paper tiger.”
Environmental activists also are criticizing the report for its nonbinding nature, arguing that the lack of mandates in the deal will hurt the clean energy economy from growing. “Instead of much-needed mandates, the agreement is full of nonbinding good intentions,” said the National People’s Action coalition, representing 29 grassroots groups in 18 states. “Nations must submit targets for greenhouse gas cuts, but will not be held to meeting them. And while rich nations made pledges of aid to poor nations, they cannot be held to those promises.”
The administration said Sunday that the deal had to be nonbinding to avoid almost-assured rejection from the Republican-controlled Senate.
But selling the climate deal to Republicans does not appear to be a high priority for the administration’s post-Paris agenda, at least not immediately. The administration’s senior climate change negotiator, Todd Stern, will start the Washington victory lap Tuesday with an appearance at the liberal think tank Center For American Progress.
The think tank says Stern will discuss “his singular insights into the negotiating dynamics on the ground, the outcomes of the conference and what the new climate agreement means for the future of U.S. and international efforts to combat climate change.”
The group, a close ally of the Obama administration, said the deal that was agreed to by 196 countries on Saturday constitutes “a critical step forward in global efforts to meet the climate challenge and establishes a framework for international action for years to come.”
Next up in the victory lap line-up is Brian Deese, the president’s senior climate adviser. Deese will be discussing the deal Wednesday at an event hosted by the New Republic magazine, called the “Next Frontier of Climate Change.” He will be joined by a number of speakers from environmental groups, including the Union of Concerned Scientists.
After that, it’s off to the Wilson Center where Paul Bodnar, the White House’s senior energy and climate policy director, will participate in a panel discussion Wednesday afternoon called “Beyond the Paris Climate Talks: What was Achieved and what Remains to be Done.”
Although the Paris deal is nonbinding, Pyle said, “Unfortunately, this won’t stop the president from pursuing a domestic climate agenda that will raise energy prices on American families, but will have no impact on the climate.” Pyle was referring to the president’s Clean Power Plan, which underpins the U.S. commitments to the Paris deal and requires states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions a third by 2030.
President Obama “is going to have a tough time selling this climate deal to the Senate,” despite it being voluntary, says Noah Wall, grassroots campaign director of the conservative group FreedomWorks. “Congress has already passed resolutions of disapproval rebuking his radical environmentalist agenda, which include heavy regulations for coal-fired power plants and energy-efficiency standards for vehicles.”
“These regulations come with a hefty price tag for consumers,” Wall said. He said the regulations, including the Clean Power Plan, will cost more than $8 billion per year, which he said is based on EPA’s own estimate. Others say the cost will be significantly higher, with annual estimates ranging from $29 billion to $39 billion.
Any bills to repeal the regulations certainly would be vetoed by the president. None of the resolutions passed by the Senate and House have enough votes to make them veto proof.
The rules also are being challenged in federal appeals court by more than two dozen states, asking to stay the rules and ultimately roll them back.
