Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 550
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, the world is undeniably round; water undeniably freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit; and equally undeniably, the climate is changing, and the changes in the climate are human- caused by fossil fuel emissions. Fossil fuel emissions are the primary cause.
These are facts, and they are demonstrated by sound science. Not only is climate change a demonstrated fact recognized by all sound science on the topic, but human beings have been aware of this scientific fact for over a century. The fossil fuel industry has worked to suppress that fact for nearly 60 years, but it is still a fact.
One hundred thirty years ago, in 1896, Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius concluded that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities contributed to a global ``greenhouse effect'' driving global warming. That was 1896.
In 1968, at a celebration of the hundred-year anniversary of the fossil fuel industry, the physicist Edward Teller warned that greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels cause a greenhouse effect and that increased use of fossil fuels would cause global warming and severe sea level rise. His audience, obviously, was fossil fuel executives at that event commemorating the 100 years of the fossil fuel industry.
This chart is of the famous Keeling Curve, which shows the dramatic acceleration in CO
This data, actually, from back here comes from scientists who collect core samples in glaciers, date the core samples, and can test the bubbles that are preserved in those ice core samples from ancient glaciers. I have actually been to the lab at Ohio State where a married couple of scientists had this immense freezer in which they had core after core after core of samples from glaciers, and very often, the glacier is now gone.
This chart shows the rise in global average temperatures from 1860 to now. While it jumps up and down a lot seasonally, the red line shows the average. As you see the CO
Between 1968 and 2003, fossil fuel interests, including American Petroleum Institute, Exxon, and Shell, commissioned scientific reports on climate change to look into this, all of which--all of which-- concluded that climate change was happening, that greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion were the primary cause of climate change, and that the impacts of this change in our climate would be severe.
The fossil fuel industry suppressed their own scientists' findings for decades, but in 2015, investigative journalists found and leaked the suppressed internal memos. These companies knew what their business was doing all along, and they chose to hide the evidence of their own scientists and do nothing.
Not only did they know, but their own scientists' work was stunningly accurate.
This is a chart from Exxon pulled from a 1982 Exxon memo. This line in black is the predicted rise, back when this was prepared, before 1982, in CO
Those Exxon scientists pretty well nailed it. I mean, that is very, very close, to have actual results track the Exxon predictions. But that didn't get out even though Exxon knew because the fossil fuel industry suppressed all of this.
Today, NASA maintains that ``there is unequivocal evidence''-- unequivocal evidence--``that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate'' and that ``[h]uman activity is the principal cause'' of this warming. That is what NASA scientists say.
NASA scientists are pretty good. We are driving remotely controlled vehicles around the surface of Mars that got sent there by NASA, driving around collecting data and sending images back to Earth from Mars. When you can pull that off, you are a pretty good scientist.
This is what NASA said: ``unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming'' and that ``[h]uman activity is the principal cause.''
The United States has its own National Climate Assessments, which Congress actually mandated by law. They are the most comprehensive source for data on climate impacts in the United States. Five have been published since they were required by Congress--2000, 2009, 2014, 2018, and 2023. A sixth National Climate Assessment was due for 2028, but in 2025, the Trump administration fired all the scientists and researchers working on that project. They even shut down the website.
Why, you may ask, is the Trump administration suppressing science, firing scientists and researchers? Why won't the Trump administration protect the American people from greenhouse gas emissions? Why are they even trying to repeal the finding that these greenhouse gases are pollutants? It is pretty simple: fossil fuel industry pressure from fossil fuel industry front groups.
This is a graph I have used repeatedly on the floor before. It is put together by a scientist, Robert Brulle, who studies the science denial operation as a social and economic phenomenon. Each of these dots represents a group that propagates the fossil fuel industry's climate denial fraud campaign. As you can see, there are a lot of them. This is a big cloud of groups whose job is to fool the American public, propagate climate denial fraud about what is really going on, and in some cases actually work on the political side to put dark money into our politics to corrupt America's response to this known danger. This web of denial, of fraud, of corruption costs American lives, and it costs Americans money, too.
By the way, voters are paying attention. A December poll found that 65 percent of American voters understand that climate change is increasing their cost of living. And we know that to be true. As chairman of the Budget Committee, I had hearing after hearing that demonstrated that.
What we see across the country is climate change driving extreme weather, sea level rise, heat waves, catastrophic wildfires, and toxic pollution. That not only drives illness and death, but it is right now as we speak undermining the insurance, mortgage, and real estate markets in places like Florida. Those parts are already in disarray. And when you can't get insurance on your home because the climate risk is uninsurable, nobody can get a mortgage on your home either, which means that when you try to sell that home, unless you are a millionaire swapping McMansions--if you are a regular person who needs a buyer who can get a mortgage on your property to sell it, it means your property becomes hard to sell. It means its value decreases.
And, in fact, in Florida you are seeing an insurance market that is in complete collapse, propped up by taxpayers to try to hold it together. You are seeing a mortgage market that is in disarray as people find they are unable to sell their properties. And Florida led the country last year in the decline in property values. It was the top State in property value decline.
This is coming at us, and it is coming at us hard. In other speeches, I have given surveys of the multiple, multiple warnings--not from green groups, not from environmentalists, but from people who understand the financial system and see this threat that is bearing down on us.
So fossil fuel's climate denial fraud is coming at American families' finances. It is real, and it is costing them.
So I have a resolution, and the punch line is very simple: One, climate change caused by fossil fuel combustion is not a hoax. I hope we can go with NASA on that. I hope we can go with Exxon on that. I hope we can go with real, measured observation of weather on that.
Second, the reality of human-caused, greenhouse-gas-driven climate change is sound science. That is essentially undisputed in the scientific community. There is a microscopic stable of people whose science usually means they show up here to testify for the fossil fuel industry to sow doubt. But once you get beyond that tiny stable of paid climate deniers, it is 99.9 percent. I mean, science is--that is as close to unanimous as science gets on this, and I urge that this body should reflect that.
And, finally, the third, Congress should protect legislatively mandated climate research programs. Science is the headlights for society. Science predicts and tells us what is coming at us. You would be a fool to turn the headlights out on your car driving onto a dark road. We are fools if we turn off the science headlights of our government as we move into increasing climate danger.
Res. 550; further, that the resolution be agreed to, that the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, let me just remind everyone who is listening what this resolution resolved--three simple points: One, climate change is not a hoax. Two, climate science is actually sound science. And, three, we shouldn't turn off our research headlights that tell us what is coming at us.
That was all. All we had to agree on was basic facts. So when my friends on the other side can't agree on facts that are so basic as climate change is real, the science is sound, and we should keep our headlights on as we drive into this unprecedented new hazard, it is hard to see how we move on from there.
I agree very much with my friend from Kansas that energy that is affordable, reliable, and clean is our common goal. And I will give an example because the developers of Revolution Wind have told me that our offshore wind facility is going to send power ashore at 9 cents per kilowatt hour into a grid whose average price is 18 cents. It is literally half the price to get power off Revolution Wind than it is to pay for the primarily natural-gas-fueled power that drives the New England grid. It is a 50-percent cost reduction; so it is affordable. Reliable? The wind blows like crazy out on the ocean; it is highly reliable.
In fact, Iowa, which has the biggest wind component of its electric grid, has actually treated wind as reliable baseload energy because where one turbine might not be spinning, there are plenty of others that are. So the people who plan for making sure that the lights don't go out--technical people--actually treat wind as reliable baseload energy through formulas that that ISO has developed.
And clean? Yes, it is clean. It burns no fossil fuel.
And yet the Trump administration twice has tried to shut down that project--twice. Just yesterday, they got blown up in Federal court for the second time when they tried for the second time to shut down that project. After $5 billion had been invested in it, they wanted to shut it down.
So we have the way to go forward, but the administration doesn't want to go forward. They want to sabotage a wind project that will bring power onto the grid at about half the current grid cost.
Our attorney general in those proceedings proposed an affidavit and, in his pleadings, said that Revolution Wind would save hundreds of millions of dollars for New England customers.
The Trump Cabinet is running around pretending that that is not true. They pretend that it is expensive. They lie.
They had a chance to come into court, where it is a little harder to lie, and say: Oh, no, you are wrong. Your affidavit asserting hundreds of millions of dollars in savings when this comes online is wrong, and here is our case for why 9 cents is bigger than 18 cents or 9 cents isn't real--or whatever it is that they wanted to say.
They didn't. They didn't pipe up at all because they couldn't, because it is not true, and every grid operator proves that by calling up clean energy first because it is less expensive.
Again, these are technical people. They don't have a point to make. Their system calls the least expensive energy up first, and once you get through nukes and hydro, you are into solar, wind, and battery. And it is only once you are through all of that that you then get into the fossil fuel plants, because they are more expensive, and every grid operator can prove that to you in the way they actually operate our electric grids. They call up clean energy first because it is less expensive, period.
So it is unfortunate that here we are with this web of denial controlling so much of what happens in this building--fossil fuel industry dark money slashing through this building--and we can't get agreement that climate change is not a hoax, that climate science is sound science, and that we shouldn't turn off our research headlights as we go into the future.
Before I yield, let me just point out that the University of Kansas teaches climate science. The University of Kansas teaches climate science. It even teaches about this stuff. It has a course called ``Anti-Environmentalism and Climate Change Denial in America,'' in addition to a ``Climate and Climate Change'' course, a ``Climate Change and Hazards Planning'' course, and a ``Climate Science'' course.
When your home State university is teaching the science of climate change, you ought to be able to agree that climate science is real and that climate change is not a hoax.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source