Republicans should not be blamed for failing to support environment through Kyoto Protocol
Kai Chan GS's column in the April 19 edition of the 'Prince' unfairly blames much of the United States' opposition to the Kyoto Protocol on the Bush administration. Chan is quite loose with his facts in a desperate attempt to reinforce the stereotype of Republicans as anti-environment and anti-Earth. If one were to take his article at face value, one would be led to believe that the only thing standing in the way of implementing the Kyoto Protocol is George W. Bush.
Chan should pick up a civics textbook and realize that no treaty is binding without ratification by the Senate. The Senate, by a vote of 95-0, definitively stated that it will not ratify the Kyoto protocol if developing countries do not agree to limit emissions and if the U.S. economy is substantially hurt by such ratification. In other words, Democrat and Republican senators unanimously oppose the Kyoto Protocol. What Chan labels as, "Bush's despicable climate change position" is shared by everyone on Capitol Hill and an overwhelming preponderance of Americans.
The Clinton administration never submitted Kyoto to the Senate for ratification. To make matters worse, the non-partisan General Accounting Office (GAO) blasted the Clinton administration for having no plans by which to reduce greenhouse gases even as Clinton negotiators were debating the Kyoto Protocol's final details in December 1997. According to the GAO, on the day the treaty was agreed upon, the Clinton administration had no plans on how to implement the proposal, no evidence that such plans were being formulated, no plan for coordination between the 14 federal agencies involved, no cost-benefit analysis, no targets for the United States to reach and no plans for plans.
Instead of blaming just the Bush administration for not implementing the Kyoto Protocol, Chan should be blaming Democrats just as much. Chan should also realize that the protocol is at least a couple decades away from implementation regardless of who is in the White House. Mark W. Phanitsiri '01
Read More
For the record, video cameras at CPUC meetings must not go
Alex Norbrook“The right to video record is essential as a tool of accountability. Video allows journalists, activists, and spectators to capture a moment beyond what is said — it can record how someone speaks, or how someone reacts to speech.”
“The right to video record is essential as a tool of accountability. Video allows journalists, activists, and spectators to capture a moment beyond what is said — it can record how someone speaks, or how someone reacts to speech.”
We need to keep breaking the glass ceiling of the ivory tower
Maria Luisa Vieira Parada“At Princeton, that means ensuring that there is upward career growth available for women. Women make up only 33 percent of tenured and tenure-track faculty, the people who could be potentially in line for higher administrative leadership at the University.”
“At Princeton, that means ensuring that there is upward career growth available for women. Women make up only 33 percent of tenured and tenure-track faculty, the people who could be potentially in line for higher administrative leadership at the University.”
Reactions: Guests respond to Eisgruber and Calhoun’s statements on protesting
Zeke DouglasRosenthal, Edward Yingling, and Wyatt BrowneGuests weigh in with their thoughts on free speech, institutional neutrality, and the role of the ‘Prince’ with respect to the University's statements on encampments.
Guests weigh in with their thoughts on free speech, institutional neutrality, and the role of the ‘Prince’ with respect to the University's statements on encampments.
