Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2017--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I see that Senator Cardin has arrived, so I will yield to him in one moment. But while Senator Cornyn is still on the floor, I want to express the sorrow and sympathy of the law enforcement community in Rhode Island for the loss Dallas has sustained.

As anybody who has served in law enforcement knows, the two worst words an officer can hear are ``officer down.'' They don't know who it is, but they know it is one of theirs, and it is a sign of a casualty among the brotherhood and sisterhood of the police department. Those Dallas police officers had to hear the same words over and over again on that deadly night: Officer down. Officer down. Officer down.

I think it has shocked the entire country, and I have certainly seen people come from all around the United States when we have lost police officers in Rhode Island. They come and stand in the freezing cold outside of churches where a funeral is going on. They come in groups wearing bands. They come to show their respect. It is not just the men and women of law enforcement in Dallas and in Texas who feel this, everyone across the country does. I wanted to express that to the people of Dallas, the law enforcement community of Dallas, and our friend Senator Cornyn of Texas.

With that, I will now yield to Senator Cardin, who will speak on a different subject.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, we expect that the Senator from Delaware will be here shortly, but in the meantime, let me begin with a few remarks.

This is the 144th time I have come to the floor to urge Congress to wake up to the threat of climate change. This week, something new is happening. I am joined by colleagues who will help me shine a little light on the web of climate denial and spotlight the bad actors in the web who are polluting our American discourse with phony climate denial.

This web of denial, formed over decades, has been built and provisioned by the deep-pocketed Koch brothers, by ExxonMobil, by Peabody coal, and by other fossil fuel interests. It is a grim shadow over our democracy in that it includes an electioneering effort that spends hundreds of millions of dollars in a single election cycle and threatens any Republican who steps up to address the global threat of climate change.

Just one of those electioneering groups, the Koch brothers-backed Americans for Prosperity, has openly proclaimed that if Republicans support a carbon tax or climate regulations, they would be ``at a severe disadvantage in the Republican nomination process.'' It would mean their political peril. When that threat comes from a group that has openly and notoriously pledged to spend $750 million in an election cycle, that is a threat that serves notice on the political class to behave, and regrettably the political class too often does behave in the face of that kind of money.

I see that Senator Coons has arrived, and I am delighted to yield the floor to him.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, for purposes of the floor, I would like to say I understand Senator Sullivan from Alaska will be coming, and I will end my remarks so he can speak as soon as he arrives, but in the meantime, I would like to intersperse my remarks between the various speakers who come. So Senator Sullivan should not be disconcerted if he sees me speaking. I will draw to a rapid conclusion and allow him the floor and I will reclaim it at the conclusion of his remarks.

When I finished my remarks a moment ago, I was describing the polluter-funded front group that with one hand threatened to spend $750 million in this election cycle and with the other hand threatened to cause ``severe disadvantage'' in the Republican nomination process and ``political peril'' to people who crossed them in their denial of climate change. That raises the obvious question: Why all that money? Why all those threats? Well, the threats are there and the money is that big because the stakes are very high.

The International Monetary Fund, which is a generally respected organization filled with very intelligent people, has determined the fossil fuel industry receives nearly $700 billion in what they call effective subsidies in the United States alone every year. How hard would you fight to protect an effective subsidy of $700 billion a year? No wonder throwing $750 million around seems like a wise investment by the big polluters.

The fossil fuel industry has another problem, which is that it faces worldwide consensus about the urgent need to address climate change, consensus from the American public, consensus from every single major American scientific society, consensus from a vast number of major American companies. Essentially, the heraldry of American corporate leadership signed on to the Paris Agreement--every single U.S. National Lab, the scientists who have been mentioned before from NASA and from NOAA, whom in every other respect we count on.

Imagine the NASA scientists who have put an explorer onto the surface of Mars, and they are driving a rover around the surface of Mars right now. Do we think they might know a little science? And yet when they tell us climate change is a serious threat, suddenly we can't pay any attention to that any longer because you have the Koch brothers, with all their money, telling everybody don't listen. You also have America's national security, military, and intelligence leaders warning us of the threat. You have the Pope calling on us to take action and most world leaders.

So if you are the fossil fuel industry, what do you do? You come to Congress, to the chokepoint for legislation, and you put a chokechain on the Republican Party so you can snap it to heel. In support of that, they perpetrate this web of climate denial.

This is actually a graphic of the web that was done by one of the academic researchers who specializes in this area. Why do they do this? Well, to do their best to fool the public about the risk of climate change, to provide talking points to rightwing talk radio, to take advantage of a lazy media's impulse to offer both sides of the story, even when one is false, and of course to hide the hands of the fossil fuel protagonists who are behind the scenes.

So it is long past time we shed some light on the perpetrators of this web of denial and expose their filthy grip on our political process. It is a disgrace, and our grandchildren will look back at this as a dirty time in America's political history because of their work.

I am grateful to my colleagues who are joining in this effort, today and in the days to come, to help spotlight the lengths to which the Koch brothers and other fossil fuel fronts go to advance their economic self-interests by sabotaging America's response to the climate crisis.

As we look into this, we are aided by a growing body of research examining the web of denial and examining how the actors in that web propagate climate denial. So let's listen to some of the experts.

Drexel University professor Dr. Robert Brulle calls the web of denial in his research ``the climate change countermovement.'' In his 2013 paper, ``Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations'' Professor Brulle describes that movement as a constellation of organizations--as you see here depicted in a graphic from that very paper--that, he says, ``engages in a wide variety of activities opposing any legislative attempts to enact mandatory restrictions on carbon emissions.''

The green diamonds--here, and here, and here, and here--are the big funders: fossil fuel billionaires' foundations, for instance, the American Petroleum Institute, and so on.

The blue circles--here, here, and here--are the who's who of climate denial groups. The Heartland Institute is in here, for instance. They are that classy bunch who compared folks concerned about climate change to the Unabomber, just to give you a sense of what sort of people they are. There is the Hoover Institution; there is the Heritage Foundation; there is the Cato Institute; there is the Mercatus Center, to name just a few of the climate saboteurs on Dr. Brulle's graph.

Brulle's research describes these groups as part of what he calls-- and I will quote him here--``a deliberate and organized effort to misdirect the public discussion and distort the public understanding of climate''--``to misdirect . . . and distort.''

The coordinated tactics of this network in its effort to misdirect and distort, said Brulle--and I will quote him again--``span a wide range of activities including political lobbying''--we certainly see plenty of that here--``contributions to political candidates,'' plenty of that--``and a large number of communication and media efforts that aim at undermining climate science.''

This is Professor Brulle's depiction of the web of denial. This chart is from a 2011 study by Professors Riley Dunlap of Oklahoma State University and Aaron McCright of Michigan State University, describing the behavior of the major actors in what they call the ``climate denial machine.'' That is their quote. Remember, Professor Brulle calls it the ``climate change countermovement.'' These two researchers call it the ``climate change denial machine'' and, of course, we call it the ``web of denial.''

I see that Senator Warren has come to the floor. I will gladly yield to her and resume my remarks when there is again room on the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I thank Senator Warren for her terrific remarks. When I left off speaking, we were talking about the-- not just the web of denial of organizations that have been propped by the polluters to look as though they are real and to broadcast phony science, but also to know that people are on the hunt looking for them.

I had begun to talk about the academic researchers who are treating this web as a social phenomenon--as a bizarre sociopolitical phenomenon--and beginning to look at how it works. I mentioned first Dr. Brulle of Drexel University, and then we were looking at the work of Dr. Dunlap and Dr. McCright--Dr. Dunlap from University of Oklahoma and Dr. McCright from Michigan State University.

Let's look for a minute at what they say in their publications. When you listen to this, consider today's blockaded Senate Chamber. I will quote them.

It is reasonable to conclude that climate change denial campaigns in the U.S.--

This stuff-- have played a crucial role in blocking domestic legislation and contributing to the U.S. becoming an impediment to international policymaking. Because of the perceived threat posed by climate change to their interests--

To the fossil fuel interests-- actors in the denial machine have strived to undermine scientific evidence documenting its reality and seriousness. Their success in these efforts weakens an essential component of societal reflectivity when the need is greater than ever.

With that quote, I will yield the floor. I see my friend Senator Sullivan has arrived.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I understand the majority leader will be coming to close out the Senate shortly and then allow us who are speaking to continue after that. I see Senator Scott here, so let me yield to him.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source