Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: megatherium

No, I recall the Clinton Administration not wanting to submit the treaty because they knew it would have been blasted by the Senate.

Nevertheless, Kerry supports it!


4 posted on 10/01/2004 1:50:48 PM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Perdogg

http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Kyoto_Protocol


Summary: The United States, although a signatory to the protocol, has neither ratified nor withdrawn from the protocol. The protocol is non-binding over the United States unless ratified.

On June 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be negotiated, the U.S. Senate passed by a 95-0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States". Disregarding the Senate Resolution, on November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Aware of the Senate's view of the protocol, the Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol for ratification.


8 posted on 10/01/2004 1:54:42 PM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Perdogg

Why wouldn't he support it? He's been wrong on everything else.


19 posted on 10/01/2004 3:31:21 PM PDT by brooklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson