tv White House Wont Say if President Believes in Climate Change CSPAN June 2, 2017 7:06pm-7:46pm EDT
record and researches would soon be able to defeat lee. >> you can find the rest of the history program on her website c-span .org, now on c-span two on to today's white house briefing with administrator scott pruitt and shawn spicer. [inaudible conversations] good afternoon, everyone. eta admission pruitt is here
today to deliver a brief statement on the president's announcement yesterday and answer any questions you have regarding the tran 828. as always, i ask that you keep your questions for administer pruitt on topic. once he's finished i'll be back to answer questions of the day. i would note that he has a flight to had to so will keep this relatively short on his end. >> it's good to be with you this afternoon. i want the first began by saying that the president made a very courageous decision yesterday in the on behalf of america and he put america's interest first with respect to environmental agreements and international discussions. i really appreciate his fortitude and i appreciate his leadership in this matter, the discussion of the last several weeks has been one of a thoughtful deliberation. he heard many voices, voices across the wide spectrum of advantage points and the president made a very informed, i think, important decision for
the countries benefit. what we have to remember when it comes to environmental agreement and international agreements with respect to things like the paris agreement we have nothing to be apologetic about as a country. we have reduced our co2 footprint to levels of an early 1990s and, in fact, from 2,002,014 we reduce our carbon footprint by up over 18%. that's been largely accomplished through innovation, and technology. not government mandates. when we look at issues like this we are leading with action and not words. i also want to say that the exiting paris does not mean disengagement. in fact, the president said yesterday that paris represents a bad deal for this country, it doesn't mean that we won't continue the discussion. export our innovation, export our technology to the rest of the world to demonstrate how we get better here is a very important message them. he indicated that he will reenter paris or engage in a
discussion around a new deal. a commitment to putting america first. the president said routinely that he will put the interest of american citizens at the head of this administration. trade policy, national security, that border security, rightsizing washington dc and he did that with respect to a decision yesterday on paris. so, with that, answer any questions you may have. i don't know your names so you have to give me that. i'll point you and we'll go from there. >> hoping you can clear this up once for all, yes or no, does the president believe that climate change is real and a threat to the united states? >> what's interesting about the discussions we had over the last several weeks have been focused on one singular issue: is paris good or not for the country. that's a discussion of how the present. that's been my focus. the focus remained on whether paris but at a disadvantage and, in fact, it did. put it at an economic disadvantage. you may not notice but parent
set its target at 28% with the entire agenda of the previous demonstration we still sell 40% short of those targets. it was a failed deal to begin with and even if all of the targets were met by all of the nations across the globe it only reduced the temperature by less than two tenths of 1 degree. that is something that the president focused upon with respect to how it impacted us economically and whether they were good environmental objectives that were achieved as a result of paris. his decision was no and that was the extent of our discussion. >> yes ma'am. [inaudible] there were other studies published at the time, the mit
study was something that as you indicated, so to ten to 1 degree and they didn't have a point on the market as far as a study at the time but there are many at this point that we can provide to you but was clear about paris, was clear, is if you go back and look at the criticism that was being levied against the paris agreement, it wasn't just folks in this country who wanted to be ratified or critical to processes, the environmental last was very critical of paris. in fact, james hansen is an individual who said at the time it was a fake and fraud and the general counsel said the same thing. if you go back and read the media counts there is much criticism, largely because it did not hold nations like china and india accountable. as you know, china did not have to take any steps until 2030, india had no obligation until two and half trillion dollars of aid were provided and russia,
when they set their targets, had 1990 as a baseline which allow them to continue more co2. in this country, we had 226-28 greenhouse gases reduction which represented the power plant and the climate action agenda of the previous administration. yes, sir. >> i like to go back to the first question that you didn't answer but does the president believe today that climate change is a hoax? he said in the campaign and use that in the. [inaudible] and what if you can speak for him. >> i did answer the question because i said the discussion the present and i had over the last several weeks has been focused on more key issues. is paris good or bad for the country christmas present and i focus our attention there and he determined that it was bad for this country. it hurt us economically. it didn't achieve good and i'm top of that he made the decision
to reject the paris deal. yes, right there. >> given the fact that you and other administrative officials haven't been able to outline the president's view of climate change, why should other countries believe that the president wants to negotiate any deal? >> as i indicated in my comments yesterday, the president emphasized in his speech, this administration and the country as a whole we have taken significant steps to reduce our co2 footprint. to levels of the pre- 1990s. what you won't hear, how do we achieve that contract largely because of technology, bracketing and horizontal drilling that allows a conversion to natural gas in the generation of electricity. you won't hear that from the environmental left. we need to export clean coal technology. we need to export the technology and natural gas to those around the globe india, china, help them learn from us on how what we've done to achieve good outcomes. we lead with action, not words. paris, truly, paris is a bunch of words committed to very, very environmental bit and cost
substantially amount of money but as an economic disadvantage. yes, sir. >> does the president believe or the omission to believe that any additional deal or target admissions, paris or any subsequent deal. >> i missed the first part of your questions back does the admission believe any deal whether. [inaudible] >> i think it's clear in respect to the paris agreement that there are concerns by the administration, the president expressed this constitutionally it is become i have similar concerns that it should have been cemented to the us senate for ratification. it depends on the nature of the deal. what you actually negotiate. if you talk about export, innovation and technology to the rest of the globe i would say
not. i would say that's not something that needs to be submitted to the u.s. senate. i would say, however, if you're sitting targets, if you're setting emission targets, their enforceable domestically to regulation or statute then very much so the voice of american citizens across the country need to be heard in the ratification process. yes, sir. >> are busy, a lot of people from the white house are not willing to answer this question what does the admission efficiently. let's talk about your personal views. in march you said there's tremendous disagreement about the degree of human impact and we were not agree that it permits to global warming. what human activity contributes at all to global warming. >> i'm not sure if you got my confirmation process but it's a very intensive process, by the way. that confirmation process i indicated that, in fact, global warming is occurring, that human activity contributes to it, in some manner. measuring with precision, from my perspective, the degree of human touch vision is very challenging but it still begs the question what we do about it. does oppose an existential threat? you know, people have called me
a chronic skeptic or chronic denier. i don't know what it means to deny it chronically. i would say there a chronic exaggerator's. many of you, i don't know if you saw the article or not, the climate of complete certainty by bret stevens. it was in the new york times. he talked about and i'll just read a quote because i think it's an important quote from this article: anyone who's read the 2014 reports of the ipc p knows that while the modest 0.8f the earth has occurred since 1880. much else that passes as except the fact is really a matter of probabilities. that's especially true of this fixated models and simulations by which scientists attempt to appear into the chronic future. to say this is it to deny science is to deny on it fully. look, what the american people deserve, what the american people deserve is a debate objective, transparent discussion about this issue.
what paris represents, what paris represents is an international agreement that put this country at a disadvantage with very little benefit environmentally across the glo globe. >> tonight as a follow-up question? why is the arctic shelf marked melting but require the sea levels rising require the hottest temperatures in the last decade essentially the hottest temperature that we seen on record -- >> little odd when nassau says that the -- you are throwing out information that says maybe this is been exaggerated or supported talking about climate exaggerator's it seems to a lot of people around the world that you and the president are
denying the reality and the reality of the situation is that climate change is happening and it is a significant threat to the planet. >> let me say this and i said in the confirmation process and i said yesterday. they are -- we have done it for minutes amount as a country to achieve productions in co2. we had done that to technology and innovation. will continue to do that. we have continued to stay engaged. we are part, as you know, of the triple c and that process encourages voices by subnational groups and by countries across the globe and we are going to stay engaged and try to work through agreements and achieve outcomes that put america's interest first. this is not a message to anyone in the world that america is somewhat apologetic of the co2 position. we are actually making advances and we just not going to agree to framework and agreements that put us in an economic disadvantage and hurt citizens across the country. yes, sir.
>> you're putting your hand and head in the sand. there's no evidence of that. >> your. [inaudible] he is very nervous about lower-level career government employees and the epa and state department actually executing what been done in the paris climate corporate as the admission or of epa, what you say to your own -- >> what's important to know that the president said unequivocally yesterday that the target set in paris, the 26-28 are not enforceable and he will be complied with. the green climate where the united states committed $3 million for the initial funding is not going to continue. that is unequivocally and that will be immediate. there are discussions going on going with the justice department on the steps that will be taken to execute the withdrawal and exit and that something that will be happening
over the next several weeks. as far as the targets are concerned, as far as the green climate fund, that is immediate and it is something that is clear. >> your leaders made it very clear that the deal could be you renegotiated how does he renegotiate the deal and the other parties -- >> as indicated. whether it's part of the paris framework or a new deal. it's either approach. >> what if they don't sit down at the table coursework. >> that's up to them. what the united states has exceeded the table, we are the united states. we are leading with respect to co2 reduction and we made tremendous progress, if nations around the globe want to see to learn from us on what were doing to reduce our co2 footprint, we will share that with them. that's something that should occur.
and will occur in the future. we will reach out and investigate with nations who seek to achieve that. >> you're the epa and measure, should you be able to tell the american people whether or not the climate change is a hoax where you stand. >> as i indicated several times to the process there's enough to deal with the paris agreement in making an informed decision about this important issue. that's refocus over last several weeks have been. i'd answer the question a couple times. yes, sir. this gentleman right here. >> thank you. isn't it a concern that the united states has broken a promise to a hundred 90 countries and the president did not address that particular point and a second, several times you've raised the lowering of co2 levels. isn't a reason for lower co2 levels because of blocking the smokestack skus that are now not allowed the kind of regulation that the ministration is now opposing. >> as i understand it largely we have reduced our co2 footprint through innovation and technology, not the least of
which is hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. the first part of your question. >> is in it. we broke a promise to 190 countries and how does that help our credibility. >> if it was a promise that was enforceable and would obligate this country than it should've been ratified as a treaty, right respect the exposure here to us domestically was 26-28% target that was part of an international agreement and their provisions in the clean air act that actually allow a lawsuit to be filed domestically to compel regulations to meet those kind of percentages. this was much about constitutional legal concern as anything else. the president dealt incisively with that. again, the important thing here is to put us at a disadvantage for the world applauded when we join. why christmas they applauded because they knew it but this country at an economic disadvantage and the reason you european leaders want us to stay in is because they know it will shackle our economy though we are leading the world in respect
to our co2 reduction. i have to head to the airport. thank you. >> back to earlier this morning the made-up support was released showing that americans seeking jobs are having more success finding at any point in the last 16 years. there's a lot of positive signs coming out of the job market, over 600,000 private sector jobs have been added since the president had office and the unappointed rate which gives a broader look at an apartment and under a permit for percentage points of the present office in january. long-term unimportant is down by a 187,000 since present office and america's minors and the drillers are getting back to work. with that sector showing job growth for the seventh straight
month. the president not going to stop until every american who wants to work can find meaningful employment. that's why were working tirelessly on policies that will keep the economy growing with a tax plan that will lead more money in the pockets of hard-working americans and making it easier for businesses to thrive in infrastructure initiative that will bring $120 and put americans back to work and repealing outpacing obamacare with a system that encourages competition and drives prices down, and a systematic regulatory reform to reduce unnecessary burdens on manufacturing and other key industries aiming for the most far-reaching rollbacks since the reagan years. you can expect the president to be focus even more on job this month and holding events in washington and outside pushing his progrowth, pro- job agenda. later this afternoon the president will be signing it to bills that were both passed with
bipartisan support that help protect those who protect us. our nation's veterans and public safety officers. first, the public safety officers benefit improvement act of 2017 which with cosponsored by senate judiciary chuck grassley of iowa and senator legrand of new york it was universally passed by the senate last month. it will reduce the unacceptable backlog of families awaiting approval of survival benefits and public safety officers that was killed in the line of duty. the second is the american law enforcement heroes act which is cosponsored by senator john cornyn and senator amy corbett shark and universally passed in the senate and will add veterans to their forces by prioritizing the department of justice funding to law enforcement agencies that used to hire veterans. it's critical that we support our veterans and the loved ones of those who paid the ultimate price while protecting our communities. president is glad to be signing these important bills today and there'll be a at the top of that shortly. also in washington today education secretary betsy devos
visited the eagle public charter school this morning to show the ministration support of any inclusive school environment and celebrate the launch of the department of education's new individual with disabilities act. at the state farm and secretary tillerson met this morning with foreign minister of brazil and is departing for sydney, australia this afternoon where he will join defense secretary not us to participate in the 2017 australian-united stated consultation. prior to his arrival in australia secretary not as well attend the string a lot viable in singapore where he will deliver remarks and meet with regional allies and counterparts to discuss security issues. with that, i will be glad to take a few questions. >> i want to ask about the push for the travel ban to the us supreme court. is it fair to say that one of the reasons the president wants to keep this going is our visit, we have a full court but also because he has the white house a chance to build on momentum, especially if you look at
yesterday? is that part of the calculus? i'd also like to ask a follow-up about the xl pipeline. can you give us an update on what that happened in terms of java development? >> what we've said with respect to the executive order in question has been fairly consistent sense of implementation and first court action. last night, we asked the supreme court to hear this important case and are confident that the president's executive order is well within his lawful authority to keep the nation safe and protect our communities from terrorism. the president is not required to admit people from countries whose shelter or admit terror risk. i don't have an update -- are you talking about production but i don't have that at this time. [inaudible]
i have not had an opportunity to have that discussion. >> what administer pruitt pointed out is the president is focused on making sure we have clean water, clean air and making sure we had the best deal for the american workers. blake. >> quick question for you related to the 28. [inaudible] >> i think he understands the importance of the clean air, clean water as i just mentioned. and in helping the environment but by doing so in a way that provides the american workers and our economy a way to grow. rbc, as administer pruitt
pointed out we have a lot of technology that we can export to other countries and help them. >> quick question as it relates to climate change, very simple definition of climate change is a change in the earth's weather patterns. the epa imitator said today that he does feel there is some value to the studies that say the earth is warming somewhat. does the president share the epa administrators thoughts on this topic and why does the ministration sort of back away from using the word climate change back as i mentioned, i'm not had an opportunity to specifically talk about the president about that. >> yesterday the president painted a dire economic picture if we were to stay in the training and yet dozens of the top ceos lobbied the president to stay in the paris climate agreement. why would the president argue
that if all of the ceos are saying we need to do this is the president right about the. [inaudible] >> the president advice from lots of individuals and there were other sectors that were concerned about the implementation of it. frankly, there were some countries and some organizations that are among those that you mentioned that while they maybe wanted to say and also expressed concern about the target levels.
>> >>. >> i think the reason the president is because the countries including china cannot making substantial progress to reduce their car bin footprint so by negotiating a better deal toughly we can get a better result for our country and the world. >> yesterday the president that there was a speech in english backing the president for our children is specifically called those scientist. >> so the president has made
clear since they never won his job is to protect the interests of the country and he was elected to represent. >> it has been reported the administration is using properties and is there a reason for that?. >> the state department issued comments on that to city u.s. and russia have reached no agreement they're projecting negotiations further than they are the state department made very clear where we stand dominant. >> following the kathy griffin mill down -- meltdown. >> the president and the first lady and the secret service made it very clear. >> so as a matter of
curiosity will the white house evoke executive privilege for director comey ?. >> that committee hearing has to be revered. >> that is not a note?. >> my understanding that the date of the hearing a have not spoken to counsel yet i do know how they will respond. >> so from the growth fund the president talked about congress and how would is still being drafted?. >> i think the secretary and director were hearing a couple of weeks ago laying out what they would like to see the legislation they had discussions in the house and in the senate i think there
was the perception that the president's initiative was received going very well with leadership. >> we have been getting mixed messages can you explain the president's feeling on spending?. >> with secretary bin to gen and those we're working with congress onwe are not there yet but we will continue to work with them. >> when we heard the minister say that is not a signal to policies of what is the steps they're taking to a engaged internationally on the climate? that has been achieved part of cooperation with china so will you try to replace that
with something else? technological cooperation?. >> this is a decision that was just made afternoon so for the president to engage those domestic staplers and talking to leaders of both parties about a way forward and the reason always we can engage and then talk to the leaders the that is a process that will have to evolve. >> what about the relationship with china or how he will manage? said to have as areas of cooperation obviously there are other areas the white house is working on. >> saddam relationship that the president from the established has been quite remarkable and has talked about that very clearly and
it is a model they will continue to build the relationship whether north korea or other areas and that they will work together so with a great thing is that this issue that the president has is one that will allow them to afford. >> in a recent statement from senator mccain said vladimir putin is a greater threat than isis has the president had a conversation with you about that?. >> no. >> secretary mnuchin said he would like that before the august break, but this morning it was mentioned david do what devereaux it would take to get passed through congress.
so the treasury secretary gets a clean bill what are they willing to take with spending cuts?. >> i think that is the nature of what gen is asking and that is the conversation team and - - congressional leaders and the stakeholders will have of bipartisan recognition so secretary mnuchin and other members of the team will work to see what it takes to get done. >> powless of president dealing with many mayors or the group's talking about the withdrawal from the paris agreement? how did they move forward with what he says to make cold great again? -- coal and clean energy? we have mayer's
tuesday we will continue. >> if the mayor or the governor want to enact policy, honor range of issues that is what they should do. we believe in states' rights so localities a municipality or state wants to enact a policy with their voters and that is what they should do. but i will say with respect to the officials i think of a large contingent of officials were very pleased with the president's official -- decision yesterday. >> and a lot of mayors who were opposed. >> can we have support. >> [inaudible]
what is the president saying specifically that people are feeling bad divide that has been perpetuated?. >> i would disagree with the crux of that we denounce hate and any form of this president made it clear from election night through inauguration we will unite the country to move forward. >> i am not privy to those conversations. >> he was not at the announcement yesterday?. >> i don't know. >> can you clarify with a russian official conversations?. >> i cannot and as i have mentioned we're focused on the president's agenda us going forward all questions
will be referred to outside counsel. >> but he tweets about it. >> i just looked at what is on the agenda all questions on this matter going for were referred to outside counsel. >> day you have an update on the search for the new fbi director?. >> the president continues to look at candidates when we have an update we will let you know, . >> does he still believed in climate change? have you had that conversation with him?. >> does this mean the members of the administration make this support without knowing where the president's stance
?. >> maya and the standing is individuals gave presidents of vice on what was best for the country and our people based on the agreement. >> the president heard a lot of points of view of full-sized it was a difficult decision but in the end he was an phatic about getting out of the agreement was it a key decision?. >> i honestly don't know you got to ask the president when he comes to make the decision with the affirmation acquired he lets us though he has made decision spread talk about negotiation why renegotiate? >> because the president believes it is and our country's best interest to renegotiate.
>> did they sign a waiver yesterday?. >> what about his campaign promise?. >> no one should consider this to be a retreat for the president's strong support for israel and our relationship. he made a decision to maximize negotiate a deal between israel and the palestinians and to defend america's national security interest i have repeatedly stated that if that would happen. >> is there a time frame now ?. >> it is not enough but when >> following up on the
question is it the administration's position as a representative of the president? period we're focused on the agenda of all matter should be referred to outside counsel. >>. >> discussing -- having discussions with the media does that apply retroactive? so if you need that labor?. >> remember this did not
have to do with the law but the president's pledge he is the alternate decider with respect to a law or regulation previously working for media organizations so continue having that discussion that they have an opportunity to speak to the media so of furrowed what it is worth today it is national leave work early day. [laughter] i hope you have a chance to participate -- and also a national delegate day have a great weekend. [inaudible conversations]