Biden - The Savior of the Paris Climate Agreement

There has been an on-going discussion concerning The Paris Climate Accord since its adoption in 2015. Since its adoption, approximately 196 countries have signed the pact. This is the agreement that was supposedly going to save the world from the evils of climate change, but then something awful happened when Donald Trump was elected as President and kept his promise to withdraw us from this agreement. Democrats, MSM, and social media repeated the talking point that Trump did not care about people, about islands that would be covered by rising water, about communities impacted by hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, droughts, blizzards, famines, infestations, food shortages, and poverty. Pulling from this agreement meant that Trump was a hater of people because he was a climate change denier and did not want to be a part of this solution. About the time all hope seemed to be lost a savior appeared, his name was Joe Biden. Honest Joe told people that Trump’s actions concerning the Paris agreement would be tragic and could destroy the world, and he promised that when he got in office he would re-enter the U.S. into the Paris agreement, DAY ONE! By the way, day one is going to be very busy with Honest Joe because there are a lot of things he promised to do on day one. Upon, the promise of re-entering the Paris Agreement those who had a hatred for Trump, and his awful decision to leave this world-saving agreement, fell down at the altar of Honest Joe and praised his desire to get us back into this agreement and, again, felt comfort in knowing the world would be saved by the U.S. committing itself to this last stand against the annihilation of the world through climate change. Here is a question: how many people have actually read the 25-page document?

I do know somebody who has read the report, me. I believe there is no other issue that will impact our position as the superpower more than international actions concerning climate change. Here are a few things about the agreement that concern me:

1. Most contracts, especially ones with the implications of the Paris Agreement, have a very large “Defined Terms’ section. The reason for all these definitions is to remove any ambiguity in an effort to deter subjective interpretation. In many contracts, one would look at some terms and wonder why it would need to be defined. Most good agreements leave nothing open to ambiguous interpretation. In the Paris agreement, there are three defined terms: Convention, Conference of the Parties, and Party. For an agreement with almost 200 parties involved that is meant to save the world, will set international policies, and require a tremendous amount of money to complete, there are three defined terms. This agreement was not written to avoid ambiguity, but to create it.

2. There is a distinct difference between how developing nations and developed nations will be treated. Actually, developed nations are required to fund undeveloped nations in order for them to meet the agreed upon standards that are not clearly stated. Developed nations will be required to comply with this agreement; developing nations will be required to comply based on “respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances”; no ambiguity there! The UN has a list of developed and developing nations. Go look it up, you will be amazed at which countries are listed as developing, China is one of them. The agreement doesn’t refer to this list, but there is no defined term for developed or developing nations.

3. Did you know “gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity” is a climate change issue? You do now, it is in there. Let me just include the whole paragraph, “Acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity”. Of course, none of these terms are within the three-term definition section but, obviously, everybody knows exactly what is meant by each of them, so there is no chance of subjectivity there.

4. Bringing nations out of poverty is mentioned many times in this agreement, definitely a climate change issue.

Every person should read the Paris Climate Agreement so they can understand why Donald Trump would get us out of it. Any person that knows anything about contracts would not have gone beyond the first four pages before deciding it was a bad contract. You may ask why so many countries signed it if it was so bad. The answer is many of those countries are going to receive enormous benefits without taking on any risk, China may be one. Another reason they would sign is that very few countries are making a commitment through this agreement and, of those, the U.S. will probably be the only one that follows through with that commitment. If you voted for Biden after he promised to get us back into this debacle, then you need to make sure you have a very good attorney before personally ever enter a contract. Any national candidate that would run on the promise of committing our nation to an agreement that is so horrible to our future has to be a complete idiot, the only more idiotic thing than a politician promising to get back in that agreement is voting for the candidate that makes that promise.