Energy Policy

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. President, having just come down from the chair, I wish to briefly respond to the remarks of the junior Senator from Alabama, who engaged in a pretty stunning and broad denial of science for about 15 minutes on the floor of the Senate as part of what I imagine will be a pretty robust critique this week of the new EPA rules from the administration.

When we were all schoolkids, we probably had the chance to read the play ``Inherit the Wind.'' It is rather de rigueur for students to read. In the end, as Drummond is essentially excoriating Matthew Harrison Brady on the stand, the book ends with almost a sense of sorrow about the unraveling of Brady's argument and the kind of figure he is portrayed at the end of the book to be.

My hope is that the same degree of strange affection may be the legacy of those who come to the floor and engage in the same denial of basic science that is at the root of the Scopes Monkey Trial in the book which made it famous.

Our colleague talked about the fact that the jury is still out as to whether the planet is warming. Here are the 10 hottest years on record since 1880: 2010, 2005, 1998, 2013, 2003, 2002, 2006, 2009, 2007, and 2004.

The Senator said that all the science doesn't really suggest global warming is happening. Well, he is right. Ninety-seven percent of scientists with peer-reviewed literature have come to the conclusion that the planet is warming and humans are contributing to it.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said this in their last report: ``Warming of the climate system is unequivocal.''

My friend said: Well, even if it is happening, we are really only a small part of the problem. So why is it even necessary for us to act?

Well, we are not a small part of the problem. We are 5 percent of the world's population and 25 percent of the world's pollution. And even if the specific actions this week do represent a very small percentage of the ultimate solution when we talk about trying to get the temperature of the planet under control, that is a terrible argument in and of itself. Is that a reason why none of us should bother to vote--because each one of our own actions in and of itself really doesn't affect the overall outcome? It is the collection of all of the actions we take in a democracy that makes the difference, and it is the collection of actions we will take as a community of nations and a community of individuals that will ultimately make the difference.

I imagine this debate will continue.

Source