President Trump is getting lots of criticism for his decision to pull out of the multi-national climate treaty. The same would have been true had he decided to stay in it.
Many of those skeptical of the effectiveness and fairness of this treaty now seem convinced of its value and worth. However, had we stayed in the deal, many of those same people would have been up in arms over a loss of jobs or perceptions that other nations weren’t doing their part.
It wouldn’t have been long before people started complaining that we were being told what to do by other countries—complaints we often hear about the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Obviously protecting our environment is critically important and if companies and individuals truly care about it, they will do their part on their own whether we are part of the treaty or not.
Often good environmental changes are economically driven. Many years ago when no-till was considered a radical change in farming practices, it was the high cost of fuel that helped convince many farmers to make the change that now saves tons of precious soil.
Our economy is already moving in the direction of renewable energy and will likely continue to do so, treaty or not.
While it has become fashionable, and at times justifiable, to criticize President Trump’s decisions, there were good arguments on both sides of this issue. Hopefully those critical of his choice will work just as hard to protect the environment as they do to oppose his decision.