Farmers Statement to Congress Regarding the Current USMCA Trade Deal

Photo: Transport Topics

With the announcement of the new USMCA Trade Agreement last week by various news media outlets, there were the accompanying views on the new deal.  Farmers were expected to be significantly rewarded with the Trade deal.  Did the Trump administration keep their promises?  Some seem to think so.  Although others do not.  'R Calf USA,' a

'R Calf USA' is a cattle trade association which sent Congress a letter regarding the current version of the USMCA Trade Deal on their desk:

For Immediate Release: December 10, 2019

Contact: R-CALF USA CEO Bill Bullard

Phone: 406-252-2516; r-calfusa@r-calfusa.com

Billings, Mont. – R-CALF USA, the nation’s largest producer-only cattle trade association that lobbies on behalf of America’s cattle farmers and ranchers released the following statements today following announcement of an agreement between House Democrats and the White House on the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

“Once again the House of Representatives and the White House have reached an agreement on a measure that will provide windfall profits for Agribusiness giants at the expense of America’s hard-working cattle farmers and ranchers.

“Although the U.S. cattle industry is the largest segment of American agriculture, making it an unsurpassed economic cornerstone for Rural America, the proposed USMCA does absolutely nothing to change provisions impacting cattle and beef trade between the United States, Canada and Mexico.

“In fact, the new USMCA is worse than the old NAFTA because at least for several years during the old NAFTA American cattle farmers and ranchers received the tool they needed to finally compete against the growing volume of cheaper imported beef and cattle from Canada and Mexico. From 2013 through 2015, mandatory country-of-origin labels for beef empowered America’s cattle producers to finally begin competing against this growing tide of cheaper, undifferentiated foreign beef.

“We’ve asked Congress and the President to, at the very least, restore mandatory country-of-origin labels (COOL) so American cattle farmers and ranchers could compete against the duty-free, cheaper and undifferentiated cattle and beef flowing into our country and depressing our markets.

“We’ve been ignored.

“We should now expect the downward trends caused by NAFTA to continue, if not accelerate, under the USMCA. Under NAFTA, we lost 20 percent of our cattle operations, wiped out 75 percent of our farmer-feeder-type feedlots, reduced our herd size by millions of head of cattle, and we’ve eliminated opportunities for current and aspiring cattle producers alike with the burden of a horrendous trade deficit in the trade of cattle and beef with Canada and Mexico.

“We urge Congress to vote the USMCA down in its present form.”

Time will tell if any party benefitted from the new deal.  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel stated briefly last week that he did not like the deal.  We will see how the agreement plays out over time.  So far, the Trump administration has done nothing other than screw up a Trade deal and lose provisions that were previously in the last agreement.



Related Blog Posts:



What is the potential adverse impact of Tariffs on GDP?

Climate Change Indirectly Hits Farmers: Increasing Crop Insurance Premiums



Farmer's Perspective on Trump's Trade War: Interview

Surprise! American Consumers will pay for Chinese Tariffs!

China Raises Ante In Trade War With Threat Of Cutting Off Rare Metals To U.S.

"Trade Not Aid" -- A Shout out from Farmers to President Trump again

Former FDA Director Asked Congress For Clarity Regarding CBD in Food Products


Soybean Farmers Are Storing Too Much Soybean, Although Chemical Industry Is Greenlighting Trade Deals?


How many cows are needed to generate 50,000 tons of beef exports?


Trade War Hurts Farmers -- From The Farmer's Mouth Directly


"Trade Not Aid" -- The Answer For Trade War!


Parameters: Tariffs Affect Trade In Both Directions -- In And Out Of The USA


Parameters: Steel And Aluminum Tariffs Are Not Isolated - They Are Tied To Trading Of Other Vital Goods

1) Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


2) Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!

To The House and Senate from Farmer's for Free Trade

Photo: Farmers for Free Trade

Over the past few months, I have been following the Trade War that President Trump started with China at the beginning of his time in office.  There has been a growing unease of President Trump's ability to negotiate a 'Great Trade Deal' for America over the same time.  Free trade advocates, including members of the Republican party, have been frustrated by President Trump's Trade War actions.



Undoubtedly, American farmers have taken the brunt of the Trade War.  Time and time again, news agencies have been able to find a farmer in America who has expressed frustration and skepticism regarding President Trump's Trade War.  But don't take my word for the apparent fact.  Here is a letter from the farming community on the matter.  The message from 2.5 million farmers across America to Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer regarding farming and trade:

December 3, 2019

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi

Speaker of the House, U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy

Minority Leader, U.S. House of Representatives

Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Mitch McConnell

Majority Leader, U.S. Senate

Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Chuck Schumer

Minority Leader, U.S. Senate

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Speaker Pelosi, Leader McConnell, Leader McCarthy, Leader Schumer:

On behalf of America's 2.5 million farmers and all Americans involved in the food and agriculture supply chains -- we are writing to urge you to quickly pass the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) signed by the three countries’ leaders more than six months ago.

Each day without action on USMCA is another day of uncertainty for American farmers and our rural communities.

Each year, U.S. food and ag industries export $20.5 billion in goods to Canada and $18.6 billion to Mexico. Those dollars are what keep our farms and manufacturing facilities open. Those dollars are the backbone of our rural communities supporting Main Street USA.

Today, however, farmers as well as food and ag businesses are struggling. The combination of record low prices, devastating weather episodes and uncertain markets have had a dramatic impact on our families, our friends and neighbors. Our communities are facing a significant increase in farm bankruptcies that ripple through the food and ag supply chains and hurt main street businesses throughout rural America.

Uncertainty in trade has had a major impact on U.S. agriculture. We have suffered from retaliatory tariffs, lost market share, and watched while America’s competitors are seen as more reliable trading partners. The reasons for this crisis are manifold but providing certainty about continued trade with two of our three largest export markets would provide America's farmers and food manufacturers with a needed boost.

Simply put, U.S. farmers and food and ag businesses need a win – now more than ever.

We have a rare opportunity to bring Congress together to quickly help U.S. food and ag; North American trade is an area where we know both parties can cooperate. The USMCA builds on the success of NAFTA and modernizes and updates that agreement with important provisions that support U.S. agriculture, manufacturing, and services as well as drive American innovation and competitiveness. With both Mexico and Canada moving to implement the trade deal, it is time for the U.S. Congress to engage and adopt this agreement.

Ratifying USMCA is a top priority for the nation's agriculture community. We look forward to action from both parties in the House and the Senate and are asking that you work together to pass the USMCA as soon as possible. We are counting on our elected officials to champion the folks back home and appreciate your urgent action.

The USMCA trade agreement between America, Canada, and Mexico has just been signed.  On Monday, I will post a letter regarding Farmer's response to the Agreement, which has just been signed into law.




Related Blog Posts:



What is the potential adverse impact of Tariffs on GDP?

Climate Change Indirectly Hits Farmers: Increasing Crop Insurance Premiums



Farmer's Perspective on Trump's Trade War: Interview

Surprise! American Consumers will pay for Chinese Tariffs!

China Raises Ante In Trade War With Threat Of Cutting Off Rare Metals To U.S.

"Trade Not Aid" -- A Shout out from Farmers to President Trump again

Former FDA Director Asked Congress For Clarity Regarding CBD in Food Products


Soybean Farmers Are Storing Too Much Soybean, Although Chemical Industry Is Greenlighting Trade Deals?


How many cows are needed to generate 50,000 tons of beef exports?


Trade War Hurts Farmers -- From The Farmer's Mouth Directly


"Trade Not Aid" -- The Answer For Trade War!


Parameters: Tariffs Affect Trade In Both Directions -- In And Out Of The USA


Parameters: Steel And Aluminum Tariffs Are Not Isolated - They Are Tied To Trading Of Other Vital Goods

1) Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


2) Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!

With Globalization, Scientists Should Be Minimizing Carbon Footprints

Traveling to and from conferences should be reconsidered given the world that we live in today.

                                                    Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

We live in a world connected by the internet. With the click of a mouse, a person in the United States can be laughing and singing with a resident in Bangladesh, India. The stretch of technology has made possible the seemingly impossible. With that in mind, why are scientists still traveling around to conferences unnecessarily? That is a point of contention.

With this technological improvement optimized, why are scientists still flying around the world to attend scientific conferences? Especially, when they are advocating the world to reduce their own carbon footprint?

These questions need to be answered in order to instill the courage to change among people in society. According to an article published by the Associated Press, people tend to change when the authority is using less carbon than they are currently using.

Which is to say, a person is unlikely to change if the professor/scientist is advocating reducing their carbon footprint while flying around the world advocating the message — using large amounts of carbon while doing so. The author states that the scientist responds by citing that airline travel is around 3% of contributions to all global carbon emissions. I will step in and say — so what do you need to fly all over the world to spread your message?

Scientific Conferences Breed Collaboration

Scientists often meet unexpected scientists working on similar or different research projects at scientific conferences. The dialogue or discussion can in some cases yield great collaborations for the future decades. Which in turn, can yield important scientific advances in a given field.

Which begs the question: Are scientific conferences important?

The answer is a resounding YES. I do not think that any scientist would question the importance of certain conferences which they like to attend. There are certain conferences that can seem redundant or not important to a respective scientist. This depends on their research and interests in the end.

All scientists do not need to attend all conferences throughout the entire year. Why not rearrange conferences? To date, conferences have grown out of control to the point where attending every talk is not just unheard of but literally (and physically) impossible. Which begs the question of the need to attend in the end.

Is there a better way to disseminate new scientific findings to the world?

Webinars are popular today and well attended by different communities around the world. Why not make more webinars for scientists to watch? Then the actual scientist/professor might be more accessible if they are at their academic institution to both an audience and their graduate students. Research relationships might be stronger as a result (I thought that I would throw that one in there for any scientist who has had a “hands-off” advisor).

There must be a better way to reduce a scientist's carbon footprint which does not require them to lose their academic/research rank. The answer is not far away. Especially, with creative people and technology today. Each of us needs to think about solutions rather than just giving in to the status quo.

The article in the Associated Press gives a large number of excuses as to why scientists need to travel and use more carbon than need be. I call bull. Each of us can learn how to reduce our footprint a little each day. Which would amount to a large scale across nations.

Climate Change Is Broadly Accepted

Change is being called around the world. With the COP25 talks wrapping up in Madrid this week, more actionable plans by various nations will come to light over the next few weeks. This is good.

On top of this great news, some large investors are pulling investments out of fossil fuels. A nordic investor recently pulled $24 billion of investment funds from fossil fuel investments and reinvested them in fossil-free investments. The fund called Storebrand is in Norway and has completely divested fossil fuel investments.

In a recent article from the Washington Post, a large number of Americans broadly accept climate change. Although, the contributors to climate change and the solutions to combat climate change are not well known among Americans. The article is filled with interesting statistics on the causes and contributors to climate change and people’s understanding of them.

The fact that climate change has been raised to the international stage (which is normal) along with having an unusually large number of Congressional hearings this year so far (which is unusual), suggests that climate change may be taken more seriously in the years to come. Especially, as voters head to the voting polls next November for their choice to lead the nation over the next 4 years to a decade.

The time has past to have a conversation about the various contributors to climate change. We stand at the point where each of us has to ask ourselves, what difference (small to large) on a daily basis can I make to reduce my carbon footprint today? The small choices will among large groups add up to a large change. Let’s start now.

What is the potential adverse impact of Tariffs on GDP?

Photo: Source Today

The Trade War with China has been moving forward.  That is about all that can be said.  Aside from the usual news of the current administration sitting on the cusp of a 'great trade deal.' Some economists say that the Trade War with China has moved the progress with other nations back several decades.  What about the GDP?



The following infographic from Fidelity was sent to my email box.

Ask farmers how their exports are performing to countries, including China?  President Trump has had to reverse the tariffs placed on China.  But he plans on reimplementing them coming up soon.  Why did he stop the taxes in the first place if they were working?  The truth is that the taxes from China are not working for the average American consumer.  The American consumer is the person suffering from the added expense of imports.  This could have been alleviated or avoided had President Trump never even entered a Trade War, to begin with.  Amazing.  Stay tuned.



Related Blog Posts:



Climate Change Indirectly Hits Farmers: Increasing Crop Insurance Premiums



Farmer's Perspective on Trump's Trade War: Interview

Surprise! American Consumers will pay for Chinese Tariffs!

China Raises Ante In Trade War With Threat Of Cutting Off Rare Metals To U.S.

"Trade Not Aid" -- A Shout out from Farmers to President Trump again

Former FDA Director Asked Congress For Clarity Regarding CBD in Food Products


Soybean Farmers Are Storing Too Much Soybean, Although Chemical Industry Is Greenlighting Trade Deals?


How many cows are needed to generate 50,000 tons of beef exports?


Trade War Hurts Farmers -- From The Farmer's Mouth Directly


"Trade Not Aid" -- The Answer For Trade War!


Parameters: Tariffs Affect Trade In Both Directions -- In And Out Of The USA


Parameters: Steel And Aluminum Tariffs Are Not Isolated - They Are Tied To Trading Of Other Vital Goods

1) Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


2) Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!

President Trump Goes After SNAP Recipients to Save Money?

Photo: Washington Post

Among the most irrational acts that President Trump has done, ranks serving fast food to our nation's athletes.  Yes, our highly tuned athletic instruments (sports athletes) get to visit the White House only to be fine dined with Mc Donald's and other famous name brands.  To top this class act, our cheeseburger eating President has decided to pursue saving money by cutting out various recipients from the SNAP funding.  What?



According to Politico Agriculture, this brief message arrived in my email box regarding the cuts to the program:

ON WATCH FOR A FINAL FOOD STAMPS RULE: The Agriculture Department is planning to soon release its final rule to stiffen work requirements for millions of able-bodied adults on SNAP — a central piece of the Trump administration's broader effort to cutback on who qualifies for safety net programs.

This week? The White House budget office last week finished its review of the rule, and some SNAP policy watchers expect it to be released this week. A USDA spokesperson on Monday said the department plans to publish the final rule in the Federal Register "soon."

Stricter criteria for waivers: Under current law, ABAWDs can't receive SNAP benefits for more than three months during a three-year period, unless they're working or enrolled in an education or training program for 80 hours a month.

But many states waived this time limit to ensure broader access to the program during an uneven economic recovery. The Trump administration wants to tighten the criteria states must meet when applying for these waivers. Earlier this year, USDA estimated that 755,000 individuals would be dropped from SNAP if the proposal took effect.

State officials remain worried about the policy. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee wrote to OMB on Nov. 20 asking for a meeting before the rule was cleared by the White House, citing "serious concerns."

"The impacts of these changes would be deeply harmful and far-reaching — not only for Washington, but for every state," wrote Inslee, echoing concerns raised by local officials across the country.

Farm bill flashback: It was just a year ago that President Donald Trump signed the farm bill into law (a farm bill that, Democrats often note, rejected a similar attempt to crackdown on work requirements). At the signing ceremony, Trump touted the coming ABAWD rule, saying, "I think, in the end, it's going to make a lot of people very happy." USDA formally released its proposed rule in February. The department received more than 140,000 comments , largely in opposition to the plan.

What's next? After the final rule is released, there are likely to be lawsuits.

NEW SNAP DATA: While we're here, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service on Monday released its updated report on the characteristics of SNAP households. The 160-page report says that about 7 percent of the individuals on SNAP are considered ABAWDs.

It is shocking to see that the president can stand up in front of a crowd of people and say that cutting the food aid to 755,000 Americans is going to make people happy.  Who are these people who are going to be pleased with the expense of 755,000 Americans not receiving food assistance?  Amazing.



The SNAP has drawn criticisms and questions from a variety of angles this year alone.  Retailers have been under fire to give up SNAP data, which ultimately landed the issue in the hands of the U.S.  Supreme Court.



The number of SNAP recipients has been under fire.  Earlier this year, I wrote a blog post where the projection of ABAWD's would be as high as 3.1 million Americans.  Luckily, the number has been dropped to 755,000 Americans.  Which is still too many people to justify a small amount of savings to the Federal government over 10 years.



It is time for Americans to stand up and unite and demand that the government stop taking excessive amounts of money from their pockets.  Additionally, saving small amounts of money over 10 years at the expense of starving 755,000 Americans is actually un-American.  Asking the American consumer to pay for tariffs for a president's trade war, which did not need to be started in the first place is outrageous and excessive.



Stop trying to please a tiny fraction of the country's constituents at the expense of millions of American pocketbooks.  Start implementing measures (laws) that actually benefit the American consumer and result in a higher quality of life.



Related Blog Posts:


How is the Implementation Of the FDA's Food Safety Modernization Act Going?

Surprise! American Consumers will pay for Chinese Tariffs!

Trump Administration Cuts Food Stamp Program For 3.1 Million People To Save $25 Billion Over 10 Years - Why?

Does The Public Have The Right To Know Where SNAP Money Is Spent?

Ralph Nader: Trump Should Be Impeached For Throwing U.S. Into Climate Chaos

Photo: CNN

With populations of animals vanishing off the face of the planet, only one man could stand alone in his pursuit to think that climate change is not harming the earth.  That one man is President Donald J. Trump.  Of course, I imagine he is not really the only person who views climate change as a 'hoax' concocted by China.  With the COP25 climate talks underway in Madrid (Spain), one cannot help but wonder how such as 'outlier' could exist -- contrary to science and popular opinion (international opinion)? 

Then there are those citizens who are not only informed and believe science regarding climate change but want to rid the government of nay-sayers.  Those who do not see the light should be removed from office.  And with the consequences of not taking immediate action so high, how can I disagree?  Ralph Nader supports his argument with facts in his recent newsletter sent by email to subscribers:

Impeaching Trump for Deliberately Abetting the Climate Crisis Security Perils

It is time to take Donald Trump’s disregard for climate crisis seriously. As Commander in Chief, Trump is abdicating his duties to protect his people, instead actively aiding and abetting the corporate polluters who are causing the climate chaos. Trump is wasting irreplaceable time that we need to prevent a worsening climate crisis. Trump’s actions, expanding the fossil fuel industry’s emissions, make the perils even worse. This is another reason for impeachment—climate crisis jeopardizes the American people in major ways.

Trump denies the overwhelming scientific warnings about the devastating destruction of the global climate crisis. He calls climate disruption a “Chinese hoax,” taking his delusionary persona to loony, dangerous levels.

The world is experiencing unheard of environmental upheaval: unprecedented heat waves, rapidly melting glaciers and permafrost, record floods, intensifying hurricanes, more frequent and severe droughts, and massive habitat convulsions. Despite the clear warning signs the worse is yet to come, Trump is shredding regulatory standards designed by law to curb the emission of greenhouse gases by fossil fuels, such as coal. He is opening large areas to oil and gas production, including those on our federal lands, the Arctic wildlife refuge, and offshore.

Trump has also decided to weaken Obama-era emission standards, a move that even upset some auto companies. Ford, Volkswagen, Honda and BMW all supported the stricter regulations set by California over those proposed by the Trump administration. Cutting back on energy efficient technologies releases more greenhouse gases, reduces gas mileage efficiency, and accelerates climate chaos.

It is as if Trump reacts to massive spreading wildfires by denying their causes, then doing nothing to diminish them. To make matters worse, it is as if he actively lowers environmental regulatory standards that would have played a role in preventing these fires.

The Pentagon keeps warning Trump and his cohorts that the climate crisis is a national security danger. Draft-dodger Trump can be charged with weakening our national defenses up against the destructive power of a perturbed nature.

Sea levels are rising. City planners at Miami Beach have an evacuation plan for tidal flooding, not just for exposed homeowners, but for the city itself.

Almost every week, the press, even Fox News, reports record-breaking natural disasters around the world. Just this last week, the Washington Post graphically reported changes in climate that have “set off a devastating chain reaction in the Sea of Okhotsk.” The giant eye-witness article is called “Weakening ‘the heart of the North Pacific.’” The melting ice and the warming sea have resulted in far fewer salmon (salmon catch is down by 70 percent since 2004). The New York Times recently published a page one feature on accelerating heavy rains and destructive droughts that wreak havoc on India’s agriculture and destabilize both urban and rural life. Another issue facing both India and Pakistan is the fast melting glaciers in the high mountains that feed the life-critical down-stream rivers below that sustain a billion people.

Leading scientists, led by climatologists, are putting out regular reports, rooted in evidence on the ground, which keep shortening the time before certain irreversible benchmarks, as with warming temperatures, are experienced.

None of this enters the cranium of the oblivious Donald J. Trump. He is too busy tweeting, scheming and slandering to further his own interests. Our nation’s interests are, to put it mildly, not his primary concern. He remains bent on pulling out of the voluntary Paris Climate Accord by the deadline next year. He is making America last again, behind over  196 nations who have signed the agreement to cut their carbon dioxide and other climate-disrupting gasses to keep the temperatures from rising to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit.

Trumpland is where desired ignorance replaces presidential intellect, where reckless disregard of mounting property losses and human casualties become photo opportunities for alighting from Air Force One. Trump makes vague promises of aid only to then provide far less than what the devastated communities desperately need.

Translated into constitutional terms, Mr. Trump is deliberately refusing to enforce the laws mandated by Congress for environmental and workplace protection. He has given our government over to corporations, putting in charge corrupt corporatists qualified only to dismantle and disable these health and safety agencies. His crony capitalists are pushing out the scientists and crushing the civil servants who have sworn to uphold the law.

In making our country more defenseless against a mankind-driven upending of nature’s equilibrium, he gravely violates his oath to promote the general welfare and provide for the common defense. In a deepening emergency, he is stealing crucial years away from critical preparedness, as his own generals would tell him. Instead, he continues to mouth his insane phrase “beautiful clean, coal,” a mineral that once burned becomes one of the most deadly contributors to climate catastrophes.

Children are marching in the millions all over the world demanding that national leaders and big corporations in the fossil fuel industry move toward renewable, efficient energy with the utmost speed. These youngsters, who are doing their homework, are frightened over what will batter them in the coming decades. Trump should feel ashamed by their desperate pleas.

Our founding fathers often spoke of thinking ahead and respecting “posterity.” The desire to foresee and forestall was especially paramount for Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, not to mention the prescient Thomas Paine. For them and their colleagues, Trump would have been seen as a monarchical nightmare or and an impeachable offender on the climate crisis alone.

I have written about the link of climate change to National Security already on this site.  I have presented overwhelmingly strong (bipartisan) support (from congress) for action regarding climate change.  What more is necessary for the average citizen to see that not taking action to mitigate the challenging effects of climate change will only worsen our quality of life?



Don't believe me?  How frequently have storms increased in our nation?  What is the damage of those storms to our infrastructure?  Have the frequency of the rains started to outpace our ability to rebuild the cities which are struck so severely?  What amazes me is that those cities hit the hardest tend to ignore the scientific truths regarding climate change?



The time has come to wake up to the challenging times that face us as a nation ahead regarding dealing with the effects of climate change.  Otherwise, we will find ourselves asking the same question when a storm front emerges and threatens us: Does this storm have anything to do with the threat of climate change?



Related Blog Posts: 




Ralph Nader: “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Really!


Ralph Nader: Will President Trump Implode with Lies Before He is Impeached?

Ralph Nader: Shame Of A Nation

Ralph Nader: Labor Day and the Lost Opportunities for Labor Discussions

Ralph Nader: Nader pays tribute to old Republican Paul Findley

Ralph Nader: How has Boeing avoided testifying in front of Congress for the 737 Max Airplane disasters?

 Ralph Nader: "What and Who Gave Us Trump?"


Ralph Nader: Youth Can Change Corporate View of Climate Crisis

What Are Activist Ralph Nader's Opinions On Radio News Organizations Such As NPR Or PBS?

Over 600 Environmental Groups write letter to Congress to phase out fossil fuels


Ralph Nader: Post Election -- Next Step -- Open Up The Existing Secretive Congress


Ralph Nader: Warner Slack - Doctor for the People Forever


Ralph Nader: An Open Letter to Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon


Ralph Nader: MAGA is really MADA?


Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?


Ralph Nader Says 10 Million People Could Change Healthcare Policy - That Few?


Ralph Nader Suggests To Consumers Reading 'Consumer Reports' Before Impulse Buying


Thoughts: Ralph Nader On A Cashless Economy

Nancy Pelosi Signals from the Hill that the U.S. will still Abide by the Paris Agreement as COP25 Approaches

Photo: Politico Energy

As the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP25) starts this week in Madrid, the U.S. still appears to be leaving the Paris Agreement.  At least that is the position that President Trump will continue to take and voice to the American people.  No one from the White House is expected to attend the conference in Madrid (Spain) this week.  Which is concerning.



Reporting from Politico Energy provides comfort for those who are concerned with the potential U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.  Speaker Nancy Pelosi is signaling from Washington D.C. that indeed, the U.S. will still maintain targets that are set in the Paris Agreement.  She, along with 14 other Democrats and a whole host of U.S. Mayors, will head to Madrid to show support for the U.S. participation in Paris Agreement.  This is reassuring.



Yes, the show of support is fragmented across the United States on the surface.  Although, over the past few years, support from states and senators has gained momentum to amount to significant support in having the U.S. stay in the Paris Agreement.



Unfortunately, our incompetent President Trump believes that the U.S. should withdraw from the Paris Agreement.  This is after years of attempts to show him that the U.S. cannot withdraw from the Paris Agreement.  See this video.



The show of support by Speaker Pelosi is reassuring and in good faith.  Hopefully, members of other countries see the support as indicative of the entire U.S. -- pursuit of staying in the Paris Agreement despite President Trump's attempt to push the U.S. in the opposite direction.  Time will tell.



Related Blog Posts:


Major Trade Associations Changing Their View On Climate Change

Climate Change Indirectly Hits Farmers: Increasing Crop Insurance Premiums


The 1% Give Donation To Solve Climate Change?

Business Leaders Are More Receptive To Climate Solutions!

Does Climate Change Really Impact National Security?


Mayor Garcetti Moves Los Angeles Away From Fossil Fuel Investment

Congress Intervenes And Asks For No More Oil Drilling Off Of Florida

President Trump Is Out Of Touch With The Transition Toward Renewable Energy

EPA Director Finally Realizes Reality Of Trying To Roll-Back Obama Era Clean Air Act Regulation

Environmental Groups Question Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Cuts

President Trump's Immigration Rhetoric Damages International Science Student Enrollment

What Promises Did President Trump Make Science Research During His Campaign?

Can The President Prevent The Public From Learning About Scientific Research???

President Trump's Understanding of the Paris Agreement


World Goes Left, While Trump Leads Right - On Climate - Why?


Is This Behavior Presidential - President Trump?


Paris Climate Agreement Is A Start Toward The Renewable Energy Future


READ THIS BEFORE VOTING -- Presidential Science (WORLD) Issues!


Brings Jobs Back By Promoting Renewable Energy!