Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I am back again to speak about carbon and climate and to remind my colleagues that it is long past time for us to wake up and to address the causes and consequences of global climate change. Carbon pollution is changing our world, and it is time that our national policies reflect the reality of that changing climate. We cannot pretend the change is not going to happen when it is actually already happening all around us.
Air and ocean temperatures are increasing, the sea level is rising, oceans are growing more acidic, seasons are shifting, and extreme events such as heat waves or powerful storms are becoming both more frequent and more intense. Well-established science tells us these changes are caused by carbon pollution in our atmosphere, mostly from burning fossil fuels. These changes to our planet will continue and likely accelerate, and the consequences will be dire.
We had better be aware and prepared. Sometimes even little changes can have big effects.
For example, take the winter flounder in the waters of Narragansett Bay in my home State of Rhode Island. I am sure the Presiding Officer's home State has winter flounder as well. Many of our colleagues will not give a hoot about the winter flounder, but Congress always tends to care a lot about money, and the winter flounder has historically been a very popular and lucrative catch for Rhode Island fishermen.
In the 1980s, commercial landings of winter flounder averaged more than 2,500 metric tons per year, and as recently as 1989 it was still over 1,000 metric tons. Trawlers were a common sight on the bay in the winter and fishermen prospered. The most recent data from 2009 for the commercial landing of winter flounder is down to about 150 metric tons. It went from 2,500 metric tons down to 150, and today trawlers in the bay are a rare sight.
Narragansett Bay waters are getting warmer--4 degrees Fahrenheit warmer in the winter since the 1960s. Spring is coming earlier, and that is not good for the winter flounder. NOAA scientists working in Rhode Island found that winter flounder that incubated in warmer water are smaller when they hatch than those that incubated in colder water. Smaller juveniles are easier prey when predators return with the warmer spring water.
The juvenile winter flounder used to have time to settle to the bottom of the bay and grow larger before the abundant bottom feeders, such as the sand shrimp, were present. Now warmer water brings the shrimp in earlier while the flounder is still small enough to eat. So warmer waters load the dice against winter flounder in the Narragansett Bay, and the fishermen who relied upon them pay the price. They pay a real price.
These changes to Rhode Island are not unique to Rhode Island. We can find examples all over the country. The Pacific Coast has ocean acidification--driven by the higher levels of carbon dioxide in the water--which is killing off baby oysters as they try to form their shells in the acidified water. Again, I don't know how many colleagues care about baby oysters, but oyster farming is a serious cash crop on the Pacific Coast. An oyster hatchery in Oregon has seen 70- to 80-percent losses of its oyster larvae due to the acidic waters washing in from the sea.
It is not just the oceans and coasts that are affected. In our Heartland, rivers and forests are facing the changes coming with the warming climate. The water hyacinth is an invasive species spreading rapidly across the Southern United States, blocking waterways and choking native species.
The water hyacinth has been called the world's worst aquatic weed. The pest renders a body of water unsuitable for most other plants and animals, drains water from the drinking and irrigation supply, and can clog pumping stations and hydropower infrastructures, costing local economies millions of dollars. Water hyacinths cannot survive a winter freezing, but as the average temperature warms, this species spreads further and further.
In the Rockies, pine beetles are devastating native forests. The pine beetle larvae are killed by hard frosts, and so this kept them in lower latitudes and in lower altitudes where the temperature was warmer. With global warming and winters that are not so cold, the beetle is spreading northward and upward to higher elevations.
Fly over Idaho or Montana and look down. What was once miles and miles of green pine forest is now standing dead on the mountainsides. These forests provided timber, hunting, clear streams, and an entire forest environment for birds and animals. It doesn't look like they are ever coming back.
Winter flounder, baby oysters, water hyacinth, pine beetles, these species pinpoint just a few of the many changes scientists are observing in nearly every corner of our country. Thankfully, we now have the beginnings of a blueprint for adapting to these changes.
Last month, the Obama administration--in partnership with State and tribal industries--released its first National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy. It is an attempt to understand and head off--or at least prepare for--the changes carbon pollution is beginning to wreak on our country's wildlife, plants, coasts, and rivers.
Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, called the adaptation plan a "science-based ..... commonsense, `look-before-you-leap' strategy [that] emphasizes long term planning and management for climate change on a fundamental level.''
The adaptation strategy stresses that we need research to understand the specific effects of climate change on local fish, wildlife, plants, and habitat. The faster you are driving, the better your headlights need to be, and it is scientific research that provides the headlights for us to see what is now coming at us.
We are past the point of avoiding what is coming at us. The big polluters have seen to that. With their lobbyists, their money, and their lies, they have prevented us from doing what we should have. Of course, Congress shares the blame. This institution prefers listening to self-interested polluters than listening to science or the signals of nature.
There is no avoiding it now. The National Wildlife Federation now recommends "managing for change, rather than maintaining status quo conditions,'' and urges that "[f]ederal land and water management agencies should explicitly incorporate climate change projections into their resource management planning.''
A coalition of 21 groups--including American Rivers, National Audubon Society, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Wilderness Society, and the World Wildlife Fund--have urged the Federal Government to account for climate change in all relevant programs and activities. They called this adaptation strategy ``a landmark ..... strategy for making wildlife and ecosystems more resilient to climate impacts.'' Clearly, they recognize that climate impacts are inevitable. Indeed, they are happening. The question is: How bad are they going to be? How much damage will we let the polluters do before we bring them to heel and ourselves to our senses?
The Natural Resources Defense Council echoed a recent Government Accountability Office finding that our current adaptation planning is inadequate and that this--for those who only care about money--increases the Federal
Government's fiscal exposure to climate change.
A group of 10 outdoor enthusiasts and sportsmen's groups, led by the Wildlife Management Institute, recently urged President Obama ``to stand firm on his commitment to develop and implement climate change adaptation strategies'' because they know we have to adapt.
The alarm has long been sounded by the scientific community which overwhelmingly warns about the effects of our carbon dioxide emissions on our atmosphere and oceans. Our defense and intelligence communities warn of the threats posed by climate change to national security and international stability. Economists recognize the market distortion of overlooking the costs of carbon pollution.
Let me say a word of appreciation to former Secretary George Schultz, who wrote an excellent piece in the Wall Street Journal pointing out that this is, indeed, a market distortion that favors polluting fossil fuels and gives them an unfair advantage against other forms of energy that would do less damage to our planet.
Of course, government accountants list climate change as a threat to our fiscal stability. Even faith leaders appeal to our moral responsibility to shield communities--and particularly the poorest communities here at home and around the globe--from the devastating effects of carbon pollution on God's Earth.
Now the alarm is sounded by those dedicated to the conservation of America's wild spaces and living creatures. They are warning that thanks to Congress's neglect, change is coming to our planet locality by locality. They are warning that we had better understand and prepare for those changes and do what we can to minimize the eventual havoc.
The American people are not sitting idly by on this. They are demanding action. Three-quarters of those recently surveyed by Stanford University think the Federal Government should do something to reduce the effects of rising sea levels.
My Newport tidal gauge in my home State in the famous sailing port of Newport is up 10 inches since the famous hurricane of 1938. When the next big one comes, that 10 inches is going to mean a lot of additional damage. Americans believe national preparations for the climate change that is around us will more likely help the economy than hurt it, and they are right. These changes will help the economy.
Sixty percent of Americans believe that taking steps now to adapt would actually create more jobs while only 13 percent thought it would create fewer jobs. Sixty percent as opposed to 13 percent of Americans recognize that the real economic strength we will get is by addressing this problem, not by ducking it because of the pressure from the carbon polluters.
Americans clearly see the benefits of adapting for climate change. Again, for those who only care about money, Americans see the economic benefits of addressing climate change.
I will say once again it is time for us in Congress to wake up. We are sleepwalking through history. We are asleep to the urgent demands of our time. It is time to wake up and prepare our national strategy to protect our Nation's precious resources, protect our coasts and forests and plains, protect our animal and plant life, protect our people and our communities against the inexorable change that looms.
I thank the President and yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source