Conservation Group Sees a Win for Obama on Climate Change

November 13, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (7)

By Paul Bedard, Washington Whispers

Despite pessimistic signs on Capitol Hill and internationally regarding action by the United States on climate change initiatives, the head of the World Wildlife Fund today predicted that the December climate summit in Copenhagen will draw up a framework for action that will prompt Congress to move on the critical issue. "It's time for us step up and play a leadership role," says Carter Roberts, CEO of the WWF, one of the first conservation groups in the nation to begin pushing for action to curb global warming.

Roberts held out hope that the Senate will send a signal to Copenhagen that the chamber is ready to act on the cap-and-trade legislation before it. And he said that the agreements that come out of the December 7-18 U.N. Climate Change Conference should goose the Senate to wrap up work on the long-stalled legislation. "Progress in Copenhagen will stiffen the resolve in the Senate," he says. And that could lead to an unlikely victory for President Obama, who has made curbing global warming a priority.

Laying out his predictions, Roberts said that Copenhagen should produce a framework that locks in carbon reduction commitments from developed and developing nations, which will lead to Senate approval of the Obama legislation. That will be followed by a final global climate treaty that includes various enforcement mechanisms. While Roberts says it is "fashionable" to be cynical about action, he says, "I actually don't predict disappointment." He concedes that the issue has become partisan, despite the GOP's long support for conservation and environmental issues from Teddy Roosevelt's days to Nixon's creation of the Environmental Protection Agency. But he says that in "private conversations," Republicans are ready for the "right kind of compromise."

His staff provided Whispers with a list of what the WWF hopes to see out of Copenhagen. "Rather than another political declaration," says the WWF, "we need an agreement from Copenhagen that captures important progress that's been made to date and creates a clear path toward a final treaty. The agreement must include the following key elements: outline what legal form the final deal will take; contain new, ambitious, legally-enforceable commitments from industrialized countries to reduce emissions and provide international support for developing country actions; in the context of that support, highlight what developing countries will do to reduce their own emissions and standards for how they will measure and report on those actions; a framework to protect tropical forests (deforestation represents 15 percent of global emissions); show how clean technologies will be supported and distributed globally; help for vulnerable countries and communities around the world to adapt to the climate impacts we already face."

  • Check out our gallery of political cartoons.
  • Want your Whispers first? Check out U.S. News Weekly.
Tags:
energy policy and climate change,
global warming,
Barack Obama

Reader Comments Read all comments (7)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

The government and big business couldn't care less about the planet or the climate. Remember the seventies anyone? The government and big business were the perpetrators. Have they had a change of heart? Nope - they see a way to squeeze the gullible American public further. This administration plans to regulate and tax us to death. Liberty will soon be somethign yo tell your Grand kids about....

June of AR 6:08PM November 22, 2009

Recent studies show aerosol pollutants such as carbon soot, and not CO2, are primarily responsible for ice field and glacier melting. Copenhagen doesn't address this.

CO2 is a life-essential gas that allows us to live on Earth. Without it, we all die. Less CO2 means plants start to starve. Drop it to below 150ppm, and nearly all plants on Earth die. Is that what you Progressives want? To kill life on Earth? CO2 has declined over the past 540 million years by 94%. Nature has been sequestering carbon underground during that time. Progressives want to put more of it back underground where nature can't get to it.

Why do Progressives hate life so much?

RD of WA 7:44PM November 16, 2009

I hope so, but doubt there will be much to what is won. Our congresspeople and senators are so used to punting on important issues that progress is no longer their most important product. Climate change--like immigration reform, real health care reform, gay rights, simplification of the federal tax code, our Guns R Us culture--is an issue that will succumb, largely, to what is really important to politicians: the campaign contributions that will keep them in office.

The BIG money will win again. It always does in our political system and always will as long as political campaigns aim for no more than the politicians' benefactors, protecting their interests, see as necessary: fooling enough of the people enough of the time. It's the American way.

Ron W. Smith of UT 5:49PM November 16, 2009

About this blog

About this blog

Washington Whispers has been featured in U.S. News & World Report since 1933, offering a fun, insider's view of Washington.

advertisement

Latest Videos

advertisement