Washington, D.C. -- Senator Mike Enzi applauded his colleagues today for passing a resolution he cosponsored calling for the President not to sign any global climate agreement which jeopardizes the national interest or fails to include developing nations.

Enzi said the resolution is necessary to promote fairness in international treaties and to avoid exporting American jobs overseas at the expense of our country and the environment. The resolution was proposed by Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. in opposition specifically to the global warming treaty proposed under the UN's Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) of 1992.

"Every developing nation has fewer environmental regulations and fewer worker protection expenses than we do," Enzi said. "Does anyone seriously believe that these developing nations will not take advantage of treaties that don't hold them to the same standards expected by our country? The price of the treaty will be paid by American workers in the exportation of their jobs. Another price will be the further degradation of the environment in undeveloped countries."

The FCCC agreement signed in Brazil five years ago called for developed nations to voluntarily undertake actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990 levels by the year 2000. Now President Clinton wants a legally binding agreement that will require the U.S. and a handful of other developed countries to reach 1990 emissions by 2010. The rest of the world would not be subject to such standards.

Enzi said the 1992 global warming agreement was "the nose of the camel."

"And now, five years later just as expected, we find ourselves face to face with the whole critter. He's in the tent, he's huge and he's very frightening."

-more-

Enzi said the resolution, S. Res. 98 which passed 95-0 Friday, simply calls for all nations to share a balanced burden in the effort to avoid an environmental problem, "which I might add, is supported by a scientific consensus that is generously referred to as 'unsettled.'"

"The Administration should embrace the resolution. In the treaty's current form, it would not likely survive in this body. We want a good treaty, but we want a fair treaty," he said. "We need to bring developing countries on board in a responsible fashion and if the administration looks past this resolution, it will have missed a valuable opportunity to do so."