I also want to address my concerns about the administrations 3 billion pledge to the Green Climate fund. The American Public does not support paying their hardearned taxpayer dollars into a slush fund that spends billions of International Climate change programs in developing nations to address the impacts of extreme weather. The need for spending our natural disasters is down historically while other International Priorities have increased. According to the 2014 annual Global Climate and catastrophe report released, Global Natural disasters in 2014 combined to cause economic losses of 132 billion. 37 below the tenyear average of 211 billion. With immediate global priorities such as the upheaval in the middle east and syria and iraq to a resurgent russia in Eastern Europe and abroad we should be focusing our resources on countering global terrorist threats with humanitarian assistance, democracy promotion and Embassy Security measures. The only reason i can see the administration wants to provide this funding is that there would be no deal without this wealth transfer to developing nations. Despite talk of American Leadership bringing everyone to the table to save the planet, its apparently american taxpayer cash that will pay off developing nations to act. American taxpayer cash is the only green the International Bureaucrats in paris seem to care about and the only green that results from any Climate Change agreement because after all is said and done this deal wont achieve the environmental gains that have been promised or will be promise. In fact, the environment will be in worse shape. Nations like china, that are the main emitters internationally, are getting a pass on having to take any shared economic pain. If china doesnt play a major role and contribute significantly, all that will result environmentally from paris is hot air from bureaucrats and politicians, overpromising and underdelivering in front of the cameras. There will be no temperature reductions, meanwhile, International Priorities will go underfunded. So i have serious concerns about what will occur in paris and ask that the members of this committee consider these concerns as we approach the Climate Change conference. Id like to now turn to Ranking Member senator udal to offer his opening, a. Chairman barrasso, thank you very much today. I think youre right, its very appropriate for us to have this hearing at this paint and thank you mr. Stern before appearing before our subcommittee today. We face an urgent task in paris, to bring the International Community together, to chart a more Sustainable Future for our children and our grandchildren. Nasa estimates that 2015 is 93 likely to be the warmest year on record. And the Current Record holder, last year, 2014. Global warming is one of our greatest challenges. It requires a global effort. Through a comprehensive International Agreement. Thats the only way we can tackle this problem. Its an environmental challenge, an energy challenge, a Public Health challenge and its a National Security challenge. It is a challenge to preserve our planet. And no one, no country, is imflun thi immune from that challenge or can meet that challenge alone. For years the Global Community has looked for answers to the problem. We have gone through various International Agreements and protocols. Sadly, the u. S. Has failed to lead on this in the past. But today im more optimistic. Im optimistic even with the tremendous political challenges here in congress. I have lead the charge in our Appropriations Committee to fight against dangerous environmental riders. Those riders would do great damage to our efforts in paris. I will continue to fight them and im sure that they will fail and with increased u. S. Leadership over the last five years weve made Great International progress. Weve been working on an agreement that will be applicable to all. That is what we need, an agreement that is comprehensive, that is fair, and that ensures every country does its fair share on Climate Change. The Paris Agreement takes us in the right direction, signing up countries developed and developing to halt the climate crisis. The United States must lead and set an example for other countries. This is the right thing to do to protect our economy in the long term. More importantly, its the essential thing to do for future generations. Over 150 countries will be part of the Paris Agreement, each country is setting how how they will tackle the problem on their own terms. This is encouraging and it is an important change from the past. The largest emitters in the developing world china and india are making serious commitments. Opponents of u. S. Climate action have argued that other nations, especially china, would never act to limit their emissions. Well, now they are. This is critical to ensure we act globally and fight climate pollution that leads to catastrophic Climate Change. Another sign of progress, the Worlds Largest oil and Gas Companies are supporting a climate agreement. B. P. , shell, and the massive state Oil Companies of saudi arabia and mexico are among the ten major Oil Companies making commitments. The United States can help lead this effort not only at the negotiating table in paris but on the front lines in new mexico and florida and alaska and every state. We can create clean energy jobs, we can put Energy Independence and climate stability at the forefront. My state of new mexico will benefit greatly from this agreement. New mexico is at the bullseye for climate clang with historic drought and other harsh impacts but we are also leading in new and innovative ways for Renewable Energy and break through technologies. There are currently more than 98 Solar Companies in mexico employing 1,600 people. There are now more solar jobs in the United States than coal jobs. Renewable energy jobs and solutions are in abundance in new mexico and this is true for many other states. Support for Renewable Energy is strong. Nearly half of the u. S. Senate supported my amendment in january for a renewable electricity standard that would have mandated 25 of our energy come from Renewable Resources by 2025. So while each state faces unique climate impacts and challenges. Each state has unique strengths and solutions to contribute. Together we can tackle this challenge as a unified country and so we can lead the Global Community as we confront this challenge as a unified planet. Together we can find a path forward that works. The Paris Agreement represents a historic opportunity to build a global effort to address Climate Change. Its an opportunity and an obligation and one history will show was the right thing to do. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you so very much, senator udall. I also without objection would like to submit for the record a statement from senator inhofe who is not a member of this subcommittee. Once again i would like to thank the special envoy on Climate Change, todd stern, for joining us today. Your full statement will be entered into the record and i would ask you to summarize in the about five minutes in order for the members to have an opportunity to ask questions. For that, we please turn to you, mr. Stern. Thank you. That works better. Okay. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman, i am pleased to be here and appreciate the opportunity to testify before your subcommittee. Today i want to explain the approach we have taken to the International Climate change negotiations over the last number of years and what we hope to accomplish in paris. The Obama Administration came into office convinced that we had to take bold action to tackle Climate Change, but we also knew that a fundamental reframing of our approach to International Climate negotiations would be needed. We absorbed the hard lessons of kyoto and heated concerns. We concluded targets should be set by countries themselves, not imposed on them. That all countries should be expected to act, recognizing that developing countries face unique challenges. And that we should expect strong transparency and accountability from all countries. Thats the deal weve been fighting for. The president and secretary kerry have worked hard on Building International support for this approach, working the leaders from china to brazil to india, from african countries and small island states that are facing clear and present threats from a changing climate. In particular, the historic joint announcement last year between president obama and president xi supplemented by their recent statement marked a new era of climate diplomacy. We now live in a new reality where china has pledged to peak its emissions, to bring online an average of a gigawatt of clean energy every week from now to 2030, to provide 3. 1 billion in climate finance and were where more than 150 countries have announced their own plans to address Climate Change. U. S. Leadership has been at the heart of this progress. Most fundamentally we have leveled the Playing Field by leading on a structure and process that has led to those 150 plus submissions, including 110 from developing countries. This by itself is a testament to the buy in of countries around the world and a demonstration that the old rigid bifurcation between developed and developing countries is changing. In particular, we proposed the structure of nationally determined mitigation contributions to ensure maximum participation we needed to reassure countries that they could join the agreement without disrupting their economic and development priorities. We proposed that parties commit their targets early rather than the end of paris because such exposure would push all to do their best and the result has been a drum beat of submissions. We have pushed for the idea of successive rounds of targets. We have pressed for an approach that continues to recognize that developing countries have unique challenges but asks all countries to take actions to address the global challenge. We are leading proponents of a robust transparency system of reporting and review with flexibility for those who need it based on their capacity. And we have backed nonlegally binding targets as the best way to ensure broad participation since many countries would be unwilling to accept binding targets and we are unwilling to have a structure based on kyoto and we are convinced this approach will bolster rather than undermine ambition. An agreement like this if i may say is exactly what voices from both sides of of the aisle have been calling for for a long time. A strong Paris Agreement of this kind is in the interest of the United States. Its in our economic interests because the costs of inaction properly accounted for will dwarf the cost of acting and because no one is better positioned than the United States to win big in the multitrillion dollar 21st century market for low Carbon Energy innovation. Its in our diplomatic interest because Climate Change is a high and rising priority for countries all over the world and it is untenable for the United States to stand apart. It is in our National Security interest because unchecked Climate Change threatens global disruptions. Admiral samuel locklear, then commander of Pacific Command in 2013 said upheaval related to Climate Change is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen. The thing that will cripple the security environment probably more likely than the other scenarios with all often talk about. Mr. Chairman, the climate deal is far from done but we will strive to produce a strong solid outcome and ill be happy to take your questions. Thank you so much for joining us today, thank you for your succinct summary, statement and id like to start with questioning and go with sevenminute rounds that gives plenty of time for everyone to ask questions. On august 26 of this past year, the New York Times had a story entitled obama pursuing climate accord in lieu of treaty. The article states the Obama Administration is working to forge a sweeping International Climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planetwarming fossil fuel emissions but without ratification from congress. It also talks about the Administration Working on a politically binding deal to cut emissions rather than a legally binding treaty that would require approval by twothirds of the senate. In addition, the French Foreign minist minister fabius indicated that to be successful in paris we must find a formula which is valuable for everybody and valuable for the u. S. Without going to congress. Will any Paris Agreement be legally binding on the United States . Mr. Chairman, the negotiations obviously are still under way and what elements of the Paris Agreement will or wont be binding is not something that is worked out yet. There are i would say different views. There are different views from many different parties. If you were to look at the draft text which is being discussed now you would see in provision after provision brackets that indicate the language which signifies legally binding and also language which signifies not legally binding so the short answer is we dont know. Although i will say as i said in my testimony that a core part of our own approach is that the targets countries are undertaking should not be legally binding. But some parts would be legally binding . I wonder if you think it serves the interest of this country to establish a precedent that International Commitments are made in a manner designed to thwart the constitutionally derived oversight role of congress. Of the United States senate. Well, i would not think that would serve the interest of the country, mr. Chairman. We are going to look at the agreement once we have an agreement and we will evaluate at that time and we will act fully in accordance with laws. You know there are different procedures by which United States has historically and continues to join International Agreement so we will act fully in accordance with law. Does the Administration Plan to submit any Climate Change agreement produced in paris to the senate for its advice and consent . Mr. Chairman, we dont know yet what the elements of the agreement are going to be so it would its hard to speculate at this time. As i said, were trying to were pushing hard for an agreement that does not include binding targets so were looking for something not binding. So something that is not legally binding. If there are parts that are legally binding would you submit that start. Senator, it depends entirely on it depends actually on a lot of factors. The content and what provisions are and are not binding is one of those issues. Ist existing u. S. Law is another issue. Other authorities and relevant past practice are other issues. So we will evaluate this in such time as we have an agreement then we will act as i say according to law. Because that gets into the issue of future administrations or congress would be bound by such a commitment. So i wonder if the president signs a unilateral political commitment or agreement in paris without Consulting Congress what effect the agreement would have domestically and whether it holds up long term. I would say two things, mr. Chairman, certainly theres no question that congress should be consulted. We have been up here briefing different members and staff all during this