Climate-Change Alarmists Respond to Kyoto's Failure by Demanding Even More Draconian and Impossible Benchmarks 

If at first you don't succeed, make matters even worse and try, try again. 

At least, that appears to be the logic of self-described "global-warming diplomats" who met last week in Austria to concoct their latest scheme to damage world economies in pursuit of a sham solution to a fabricated climate crisis.  At their international climate conference sponsored by the always-credible United Nations last week, these negotiators sanctimoniously called upon industrialized nations to reduce their emissions to 25% to 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. 

The arrogance of this demand is astounding, considering that Kyoto Protocol member nations have failed to meet that treaty's standards, which only required reductions to 5% below 1990 levels by 2012. 

In other words, these negotiators reacted to the Kyoto Protocol's failed 5% reductions by demanding that nations attempt to make 25% to 40% reductions in an even shorter period of time. 

Where outside of a U.N.-sponsored event would this qualify as rational? 

The simple truth is that Kyoto has proven to be an utter failure, yet climate-change hysterics only aim to make things worse. 

The Kyoto Protocol itself was drafted in 1997, and now includes 169 signatories.  Of course, most of those 169 signatories are poor, developing nations that are exempted from the treaty's requirements.  Obviously, it's easy for free-riding Lilliputian countries to support Kyoto when they aren't even saddled by its requirements.  Even rapidly-industrializing China and India are free of the reduction mandates, despite the fact that their emissions have skyrocketed by 47% and 55%, respectively, between 1990 and 2004. 

Regardless, the treaty itself mandated that industrialized (translation:  productive) nations reduce their emissions to 5% below their 1990 levels by the year 2012.  Countries that failed to satisfy this obligation could then purchase emissions credits in a "cap and trade" scheme, much like Al Gore or John Edwards purport to offset their huge jet-setting emissions by subsidizing a few low-drip shower heads in Bangladesh or Morocco.  Predictably, the Protocol also required industrialized nations to provide billions of dollars to subsidize climate technology and climate-related studies for developing nations. 

Since ratifying Kyoto, however, these industrialized nations have failed to satisfy even the 5% reductions, so their self-righteous participation appears to be a matter of "do as I say, not as I do." 

Their efforts have not come without a heavy cost, though.  Despite the fact that E.U. emissions rose 4.5% from 2000 to 2004, E.U. economic growth was 38% lower than America's economic growth.  It should also be noted that America's emissions only rose 2.1% during that same 2000 to 2004 period.  Accordingly, the costs of Kyoto have far outweighed its benefits, as the United Kingdom and Sweden are the only E.U. nations on pace to meet their Kyoto obligations. 

And although one would hardly know from the mainstream media, the Clinton Administration refused to even submit the Kyoto treaty for ratification, which itself establishes the scheme's fraudulent nature.  For its part, the Senate nevertheless preemptively rejected the Protocol by a 95-0 vote in 1997. 

Since that time, of course, our political leaders' wisdom has slowly eroded under the constant barrage of preening celebrities who have adopted climate change as their latest feel-good pet cause.  Today, many of those 95 Senators who rejected Kyoto demand that the United States bow to its destructive requirements. 

Unfortunately, even President Bush is beginning to show signs of resigned compliance with the climate-change drumbeat. 

For example, the Bush Administration is organizing a climate negotiating session to take place in Washington, D.C. later this month.  The stated goal of this and other conferences taking place this fall is to reach a climate-change agreement to take effect when Kyoto expires in 2012.  Ominously, the Administration has stated that it hopes to enact "a long-term global goal, rationally-defined midterm goals and strategies and sector-based approaches" to reduce emissions. 

Although President Bush has shown admirable leadership in refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, Americans must counteract the climate hysterics' efforts and refuse to allow American prosperity to be sacrificed at the altar of global warming.  Should we fail, our economy and way of life will suffer for no benefit whatsoever.