Washington D.C.- U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is an original cosponsor of the Climate Change Energy Policy Response Act and the Climate Change Tax Amendment. He has been an advocate of responsible climate policy since becoming a senator through legislation in addition to his participation in both the Kyoto and Buenos Aires climate change talks. The following is a statement he made regarding the two climate change bills introduced today.
"The Climate Change Energy Policy Response Act would bring the debate on global warming and climate change out of the arena of mass speculation and back to the refuge of sound, practical science. This legislation I am cosponsoring with my colleague from Idaho, Senator Larry Craig, would not only move our nation toward a healthier environment by requiring federal agencies to establish clear goals for addressing climate change concerns, but it also seeks to protect rural economies that are currently threatened by policies based on scare tactics developed by professional global warming special interest activists and the politicians that cater to their agenda.
"One thing that should be pointed out is that for many of the people who attend global warming conferences and who circulate global warming propaganda, global warming is an occupation. This is how they make their living. I make my living by ensuring the people of Wyoming and the United States get a fair deal. Committing our nation's valuable resources and our children's futures to policies that unduly burden our communities is, to me, not only unfair, it's unconscionable.
"This bill would direct the Secretary of Energy to coordinate and establish federal policy for activities involving climate change. It would require increased peer review of the science used to create that policy and it establishes important objectives for the science such as understanding the earth's capacity to assimilate natural and manmade greenhouse gas emissions and to evaluate natural phenomena such as El Niño.
"I also am cosponsoring companion legislation that would put the power of addressing global warming issues into the hands of those most affected by climate change initiatives. It does this by amending the Internal Revenue Service code to provide incentives for voluntary reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and for the development of global climate science and technology. This would permanently extend a tax credit for research and development involving climate change. It also would apply tax credits for greenhouse gas emission reduction facilities. This rewards industry for investing in cleaner technology without punishing it for thinking beyond short-term profits.
"Our entrepreneurs, small businesses and the employers and employees of large companies have the ability to protect and preserve the environment without sacrificing the global economy. The goals of environmental health and economic stability are not mutually exclusive. For example, voluntary, incentive-based programs, in combination with private efforts, have been largely responsible for the success of wetlands restoration. We made developing and preserving wetlands an asset instead of a burden and as a result we have more wetlands now than before we enacted the incentive-based programs. Resorting to federal regulations, on the other hand, has produced hostility and confusion on the part of private citizens. Why? Federal regulations are typically cost prohibitive and are promulgated with a single-minded purpose that sacrifices America's ability to respond to future challenges via proactive incentives.
"It is my hope that proponents of government-knows-best policy and special interest mandates will set aside their rhetoric and walk with us on the practical path of real, reasonable environmental progress."
