• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: Stop Meeting with the U.N. on Climate Change

    Two days ago, the 18th United Nations conference on climate change wrapped up. As they did at the previous 17 conferences, developing nations demanded that the United States and other developed countries pay them for the climate’s effects.

    In short, the joke’s on us. And these U.N. conferences are becoming increasingly irrelevant.

    Poor nations, including small islands, are seeking a new “international mechanism” to have developed nations pay for storm damage to their countries. This is based on the assumption that global warming is causing stronger hurricanes, typhoons, and the like, which is still unproven.

    Heritage’s Brett D. Schaefer, Jay Kingham Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs, and Nicolas Loris, the Herbert and Joyce Morgan Fellow, have a simple message for America’s leaders: “the U.S. is wasting millions of taxpayer dollars attending and financing these conferences.”

    The main result of this year’s conference was extending the Kyoto Protocol, the international climate change agreement that has been in force since 1997, through 2020. The United States has never signed on to this agreement, which restricted greenhouse gas emissions in 37 industrialized countries.

    But the Kyoto agreement has never put restrictions on China and India—two densely populated countries with growing economies—and other nations with emerging economies. Schaefer and Loris note that “even with perfect compliance and U.S. participation, Kyoto would not significantly arrest projected global warming.”

    Canada, Japan, New Zealand, and Russia opted out of the new extension last week. The Associated Press reports that this means the treaty now “covers only about 15 percent of global emissions.” As Schaefer and Loris explain:

    [T]he basic approach is unworkable. The Kyoto Protocol essentially placed the entire economic burden of addressing climate change on a few dozen countries while asking nothing from more than 150 countries. Perhaps this makes sense if the industrialized countries alone could address the issue by reducing emissions, but that is impossible.

    …For a number of reasons—including sluggish economies and a shift toward energy sources (such as natural gas, nuclear, or renewable energy) that emit fewer greenhouse gas emissions—most industrialized countries have seen their emissions stabilize or fall. In fact, U.S. emissions are at their lowest level since 1996, according to the U.N.

    While the U.S. has reduced its emissions, other countries are busy increasing theirs—and demanding that the U.S. pay for storm damage around the world. China passed the U.S. as the largest source of emissions in 2006, and by 2009, its emissions were already 45 percent higher than America’s.

    Instead of continuing this futile exercise, the U.S. should pursue more serious steps on its own, Schaefer and Loris write. America should:

    • Undertake independent efforts to more accurately determine the severity of climate change and verify U.N. claims.
    • Work with a smaller group of nations through informal arrangements such as the Major Economies Forum to undertake appropriate steps that are both cost effective and effective in reducing warming.
    • Refrain from attending future U.N. climate change conferences and call for a moratorium on conferences that emphasize financial transfers and reinforce the flawed, ineffective Kyoto methodology.
    • Resist and cease attempts to address climate change unilaterally. This includes removing onerous and unnecessary regulations on fossil fuels that are driving up the cost of energy, stopping wasteful and ineffective attempts to subsidize carbon-free energy sources, and preventing an implementation of a carbon tax. Attempting to address greenhouse gases unilaterally comes at great cost to the taxpayer and energy consumer for no meaningful environmental impact.

    For far too long, the U.S. has played on the United Nations’ terms on climate change. It’s time to give up these failed negotiations, focus on protecting American taxpayers, and reject conferences that produce completely unserious plans.

    Quick Hits:

    • Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, undergoing more cancer treatment, has named Vice President Nicolas Maduro as his successor.
    • Today begins the launch window for North Korea’s next missile test, which could occur sometime between now and December 29.
    • Another al-Qaeda leader was killed in a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan, AP reports.
    • The recent drop in the unemployment rate was due to workers leaving the labor force, Heritage experts explain.
    • Do you have Spanish-speaking friends and family? Share Heritage Libertad with them.
    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    59 Responses to Morning Bell: Stop Meeting with the U.N. on Climate Change

    1. Frank says:

      "Morning Bell: Stop Meeting with the U.N. on Climate Change"
      -Yes, but I'd go much farther. We should just get out of the UN & get the UN out of the USA. Maybe just send some non-voting observer, that about it.

      • Albert Maslar says:

        Yes. Climate change has historically gone on much before human intervention of human caused pollution of oil powered cars, oil and gas generated energy, and industry. The UN can be America's worst enemy as they are use US taxpayer money for their carbon tax initiatives that are designed to destroy the US economy. The current UN is UN-AMERICAN! Cut the UN off at the knees by not paying their extortion and giving them free rent in NY. Send them packing to the human rights offending countries that do not respect American liberty.

      • Rick says:

        I agree with Frank, get us out of the U.N. and get them out of the United States. The U.N. building is probably one of the biggest wire tapped and full of listening devices buildings on U.S. soil, therefore the best way to clear the building is by demolition, just tear it down to the ground. Sell the property to a group of new developers and start a fresh new building for commercial use.

        A big concern is why even allow such an organization fo even exist on our soil? The "diplomats" should be cleaned for being possible spies.

      • futurelife says:

        I agree, the UN just want to control America as they know we have a muslim in the White House. We need to forget this fake global warming and stick to facts that DC is spending way too much money and not cutting out waste to pay our debts off. We need term limits which would help do this but the laws are made in DC so that won't happen.

      • Linna says:

        Agree. Additionally the United Nations is in control of most of our cities through Agenda 21 with the purpose of re-designing our country, private ownership and using imminent domain to force land into the wetlands reserves … yes, owned by the UN. We are fighting this in Florida now … everyone better wise up about Agenda 21 … they are in every aspect of our lives!

    2. Daniel Schwenker says:

      Heritage does a wonderful job of addressing political/economic issues today, but has fallen short in addressing the solutions. Until we focus on the primary problem, which is the National Media, we the American people will continue to lose. If and when we regain a media that actually reports the truth, all these political and economic issues will take care of them selves. All major media today is simply the mouth piece for the Liberal Left.

      • Guest says:

        A M E N. America was founded on the principal that a free – and vigilant – press will keep us free from the tyranny that comes from government grown too big.

      • I agree that the national media is a major anti-Constitutional force . Unfortunately , we have no mechanism at hand to quickly deal with that problem . We do have the mechanism at hand to deal with the root cause of the rise of the federal aristocracy and the loss of the 10th Amendment rights of the States and the People . We need strong high-profile individuals and organizations to fight for the repeal of the poisonous 16th and 17th Amendments .

    3. Lloyd Scallan says:

      One word sums up the UN's reasoning for supporting Kyoto, "redistribution", exactly what Obama has pledged to do. The one common thread that links all of these UN nation members with Obama's ideology, communism!

    4. Krehbiel says:

      This looks like another opportunity for the current administration to spend another few billion dollars in order to look good while destroying the American economy.

    5. John Roberson says:

      We should have gotten out of the UN thirty years ago. The sole purpose of the whole organization is to suck blood from the US. This has been apparent for at least thirty years.

      • Ken Malley says:

        There is an old saying that appears relevant here: "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer". However, when you have members of this administration advocating actions against our constitution and the liberties of a free people that is the real problem that we must address!! Without these kinds of tactics, the UN should pose no problems for this country, but keep us engaged to protect ourselves. There was a time when a withdrawal of US support might have caused the UN to fail; I'm not sure if that is the case anymore.

    6. Wayne Peterkin says:

      The assumption that global warming is causing the storm damage is even worse than suggested in this article. The U.N. assumption is that global warming is a man-made phenomenon caused by the developed countries. Not only is global warming unproven, the cause, if any is even more questionable. It is all a phony attempt to milk a few countries, primarily the US which is broke, for money.

      • PaulE says:

        Exactly! The entire premise behind man-made climate change is nothing but an elaborate scheme to bilk successful economies to pay for the unsuccessful ones. Many of the unsuccessful economies are either socialist, communist, Islamic fundamentalist or simple military dictatorships.

      • Linna says:

        Al Gore was preaching global cooling in the 70's … our coastlines were supposed to be gone. then he changed to global warming — forgetting entirely global temperature changes, in fact, forgetting several ice ages. His goal was to line his own pockets with his $9 trillion hedge fund (now defunct). He was discovered when IOOACC was caught doing tests to CREATE climate rise. they are still trying to convince the young that the climate is warming but it has been cooling for 16 years now.

    7. Elleswood says:

      Remember, over the past 200 yrs. the Sahara desert has increased in size, depriving the people around it of arable land. Why? Not global warming. Tribes surrounding it have constantly denuded it of trees, large and small, to use for fire wood, resulting in a much larger desert. Must we pay them for what THEY did?

    8. Dr. Henry Sinopoli says:

      U.N. Leadership…it's a done deal…Heritage's new politician leader…Mr. DeMint at his next luncheon with Smelly Harry can laugh about the years they saw this coming and did nothing to stop this slide into socialism…

    9. Bob Klaus says:

      Schaefer and Loris still cede the language to the Greenies: there is an a priori assumption in their discussion and recommendations that (1) there IS climate change occurring, (2) it IS "warming", (3) it IS man-made or at least man-exacerbated, and therefore (4) the US should be interested in further reductions of emissions. They then correctly observe that the industrialized nations are disproportionately accountable for the corrective action.
      I submit that none of those assumptions are proven, and therefore the discussion as well as the conclusion needs to be calibrated.
      Thank you.

    10. Dave3200 says:

      Global warming has created an enormous opportunity for many to siphon money out of the US. It provides a forum for political scam artists, such as Al Gore, to profit handsomely from carbon banking schemes. Poorly informed liberal environmentalists persistently support the claim that man causes the warming, even when earth's climate is actually cooling.

      This combination of greedy financial interests and poorly informed do-gooders constitutes a formidable force which, supported by the current White House, is going to be tough to defend against. As with obamacare, the administration will cheat and lie to whatever extent necessary to impose more energy taxes on Americans while transferring the money to their cronies and foreigners. The UN is a key player in the scheme and it is gonna be hard to break-up the game.

      I hope y'all spend more time exposing this racket in the future. Thank you for all you do.

    11. tom says:

      I don't believe in the climate change stories that gore and other liberals are pushing, it's just another way to spend money. If you look back approximately 100 years, the temps and weather was basically the same as we are having now. Every excuse they can find, they say its global change. Stop the nonsense!

    12. sdfultz says:

      So your saying ignore the conversation, ignore the voices of the victims that claim something in the weather is happening. Just act like nothing is happening?
      Well tell that to the Sandy victims.

      • tom says:

        We have terrible storms all the time, global warming has not been proven, mostly unproven by scientist. We need to be ready, even when we ghet these warnings, to get help to victims fast, not like obama and the democrats are doing. Look at the weather 1oo yrs or so ago, same patterns. It's just another way of getting more money, as if we had any left, from the tax payers.

      • Ben C. says:

        When we can regulate solar storms in the sun and the volcanoes in the ocean then, and only then, will we be able to regulate weather. Two words for the victems of Sandy – "be prepared." Some about the Boy Scouts comes to mind.

    13. jrmbasso says:

      Is Heritage implying seriously that climate change can be affected by human efforts? That climate change does occur is historically documented, e.g., ice ages, crop growth in Greenland, etc. but there is no evidence that I am aware of which points to human contribution to or alleviation of the changes. Sun emission cycles have been shown to track with core samples from fiords in Canada and with increases and decreases in cloud cover. These have much more impact on climate than CO2.

      • PaulE says:

        We have to get away from this apparent need, now rampant amongst almost all institutions, to be politically correct at all times, no matter how much scientific evidence exists that "global warming" or "climate change", as it is now called, is nothing more than an elaborate hoax designed to transfer huge sums of money over time. Rather than promoting still more discussions about a thoroughly debunked myth, time would be better spent shining a spotlight on those political leaders who seek to sign up the American people to funding this hoax for the personal enrichment of a select few. Time to start calling these hucksters of climate change exactly what they are, instead of pretending they're just well-meaning but factually challenged individuals. Just a thought.

    14. Undergraduate says:

      Amy, nice sentiment, but a complete waste of your time and mine reading it. There is no reasoning with CLimate Change Believers.

    15. Conrad says:

      CO2 is approx. .03% (.OOO3) of the Atmosphere. We have let in efect one woman Democrat head at the the EPA manage it. Its the equivalent of a 200 lb man managing his weight to within an ounce.
      This is probably the most important gas in the world as it sustains life. Without it we are all dead. And we let one woman manage its administration.

      Where is the study of magnitude of importance and competence to manage such a minute amount w/o consequences of the high risk and high probability of mis-management by unqualified people?

    16. Alvin Mullins says:

      First of all there is no global warming, the planet has for more than 15 years been cooling. Second the UN should either be abolished or told to find somewhere else to carry on their meaningless babble. The US should remove itself from an organization that is in control of all the bad actors in this world. It is akin to cities with gangs giving the gangs some measure of governmental control.

    17. Blair Franconia, NH says:

      Why are the United States, Canada, and the rest of North America, bound to the Kyoto Protocol, when China and
      India are free to pollute? It's because China and India don't want to be responsible. Remember Time Magazine's
      January 1977 cover story "ARE WE HEADED FOR ANOTHER ICE AGE?" Back in the 1970s, we were talking
      about the new "coming ice age." Remember that? The late Paul Harvey had it right when he said that it was created by government scientists who wanted more grant money.

    18. Walt Bates says:

      The greenhouse effect of CO2 is logarithmic, ie the first 100 parts per million have far more effect than the hundreds after that. We are now at about 390 ppm. If it goes to 700 ppm the effect on temperature would be miniscule. But the effect on fauna's symbiotic partner, flora, sure wouldn't be. CO2 is their "oxygen" and that rise to 700 ppm would increase the harvest of cereals, roots, tubers and vegetables by over 40%. We should be producing all the CO2 that we can. It is wholly beneficial to us all. Study David Archibald's The Past and Future of Climate.

      • Successful greenhouse operators deliberately increase the CO2 concentrations to promote greater production. With the population exploding around the globe, food supply will become increasingly short and an abundance of CO2 in the atmosphere will be a positive thing. I've studied the available published information and have yet to see a single shred of proof that there is meaningful atmospheric effect from CO2. It is all coincidental supposition. NO FACTS.

    19. Southern Independent says:

      This is very informative and educational. What would be extremely helpful is suggestions of actions to be taken by those of us concerned enough to act. Thank you!

    20. This whole article is moot as is any arguement of "greenhouse gases" as it relates to climate change because the largest sink of CO2 in our world is the oceans, which makes up over 2/3's of the world's surface area. The ocean can sequester or release many more metric tons of CO2 than any of the 37 industrialized countries can produce in one year in just one day. We are chasing our tails here folks. Most reputable scientists believe that if there is any significant warming of our planet, it comes from sun spot activity and no amount of government regulation is going to have ANY effect on that.

    21. dizzy dora says:

      We taxpayers and charitable givers already pay for other countries' weather disasters.

    22. Lt. Powell says:

      In reading the excellent responses to the posted article, I would like to contribute. The U.N. has been a false group from the beginning. Alger Hiss, was tasked by Roosevelt to create the founding papers of the U.N.. He also was tasked with hiring staff. He placed about 50 full time employees.

      Russia had just been handed China, by Marshall, when Washington, ( Hopkins, Currie, and Marshall ) gave Manchuria to Russia. The Korean War, and Veitnam war, were inevitable after Yalta, during WW2.

      Agenda21 is another attempt to place communism into the United States. To those of you who would like more material on the Agenda 21 impending disaster, the "John Birch Society"has excellent, non-inflamitory
      material for your education. John Birch was a Baptist Missionary, and Military officer, who wanted a Republican, free Society in China. He was turning the Japanese, from fighting the free Chinese, to fighting the Communist Chinese. His plan was gaining success, when he was killed. Washingto lost China to USSR.

    23. Richard Haack, CO says:

      "Schaefer and Loris write in 2 of 4 concluding comments. America should: 1) Undertake independent efforts to more accurately determine the severity of climate change and verify U.N. claims, and 2) Work with a smaller group of nations through informal arrangements such as the Major Economies Forum to undertake appropriate steps that are both cost effective and effective in reducing warming."

      I disagree:
      First, the possibility of "reducing warming" is a false premise. Climate change, warming and cooling, occur naturally. Humans have absolutely no control to stop or change direction of change; we have to adapt to the change, and finding ways to adapt would be the most cost effective means for budgetary allocation.
      Second, verification of UN claims would be more waste of money, as all UN claims are fabricated or derived from publications. There is also no point in verifying severity of climate change. Climate change simply is…and humans must learn to accept this fact and adapt to the change. Research in adaptation to climate change would likely reveal many beneficial and cost effective protocols.

      • Ken says:

        Richard – well said and totally agree with you. Article starts out with the correct assertion that global warming/cooling/climate change is "…based on the assumption that global warming is causing stronger hurricanes, typhoons, and the like, which is still unproven." And then concludes with bullet points on how to address climate change!!??

    24. Lilly says:

      I agree there is no global warming. Just a comment … America is always giving money to other countries for help, etc. I am . wondering which countries gave help to the USA after Hurricane Sandy and previous disasters? I think the answer is none. Am I wrong?. But thankfully, we do have Americans helping Americans .

    25. Melissa says:

      I am very disturbed that the writer of this article seems to accept the "fact" that there is man-made climate change. The idea of man-made climate change is simply another ploy to gain control over free-people and further the socialist/communist/fascist (pick your 'ist) agenda.

    26. Nemo Stone says:

      We already pay for storm damage to these countries. How many millions have gone to Bangladesh, Thailand, Haiti, … in aid after major storms and natural events?

    27. John Joyce says:

      Merchants of Despair, Robert Zubrin is an excellent source to deflate the so-called green movement.

      In addition an ocean dwelling bacteria discovered in the late 80's and now sequenced has been found to be a fabulous creature that is pumping out a major percentage of our atmospheric oxygen far out stripping the land based plant production.

      It is also worth noting that the snowline in the Rockies about 1000 years ago was thousands of feet above the present "shrinking" margin and that higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon increase the temperature which promotes the growth of significant vegetative growth

      To return to Zubrin he locates the origin of the Green movement in the elitist, racial profiling philosophy originating in the merger of the misconceptions of Malthus and Darwin regarding the life-sustaining potential of our sweet blue orb.

      Where Heritage would our opinions be best directed to thwart the initiative?

    28. Casey Carlton says:

      The UN is yet another threat to freedom worldwide, along with Islam. The UN keeps trying to pass socialistic legislation on a global scale, and it would further weaken the United States. Much, if not all, of the UN initiatives are based on either flawed or nonexistent research.

    29. Dale David says:

      The UN is a real problem for the USA. throw them out of the US and get out of the UN, all they will do is step on our constitution, and many Americans do not want that but the Representatives in Washington do not have the balls to stand up and do what is right. Take the president out of office, by impeaching him for he has violated our constitution and if we do not stand up for our Constitution it will not stand and it will be our fault.

    30. David Jones says:

      Absolutely – it is time to recognize Global Warming for the hoax it is and the crutch it has become to expand the UN's agenda of gaining control over the assets of the industrial nations in order to redistribute their perceived undeserved wealth to those nations that lack the vision and energy to create their own national wealth by throwing out their dictators and building schools and educational systems that will create the resources in their own countries to ensure a viable future for their children and grandchildren, just as our Founders did over 500 years ago.

    31. 2dokie says:

      Secular regressives, if they were intelligent enough, and hadn't used so many recreational pharmaceuticals when they were supposed to be being educated would remember the "Ice Age" that engulfed north America clear down over the northern tier of states at the end of the 20th century…..OOPS that never happened either!!! But if they want something to really lose sleep over they might think about this reality: If we don't utilize all the hydrocarbons present in the north-western states and leave them in place, when the Yellowstone caldera next goes off they will immeasurably add to the effective damage and make Krakatoa look like a firefly and the resulting environmental impact will last decades after the fire goes out… but noone will be around to stress over it. Bottom line: If you don't use it you lose it, and the Regressives may try to sell them to pay off the debt they've amassed. Wouldn't that make sense?

    32. Jim says:

      I cannot believe we are still members of the U.N. America should long ago have ended its monetary support. As far as I can tell, when you have a U.N. that is made up of terrorist and terrorist organizations, why should we continue to support it? As for the climate, it's a function of Mother Nature. It cycles and therefore, there will be times when we see unusual events occur. If it were an everyday occurance, I would look at climate differently. Jim

    33. boberic says:

      I have been saying for years thar we should sell the UN building to Trump for Condos. He would turn the facility into a first rate high end tower. There would be a luxury shopping arcade with Restaurants and all kinds of high class busineses. If that wouldn't work turn the place into a parking garage. We need more parking in midtown anyway.

    34. Seawolfjro says:

      What led to the end of the last ice age? Yep, global warming, caused by the the cyclical nature of weather and the sun. There were no SUV's and pollution caused by burning fossil fuels back in 1100 AD. Next item, the sun. It comprises 98% of the mass in the entire solar system. The 2% balance is all the other planets including earth. And some have the gall to want us to believe that man can affect this planet's ecology?

    35. Guest says:

      Absolutely ludicrous! But, then right in-line with most everything which comes to be as a result of being in bed with the U.N. American government needs to get back to the task of governing. Society's problems cannot be fixed by writing more laws. Pull out of the U.N. today and send the lot packing. Our nation will be happier in a matter of weeks.

    36. Hobbie Hobbs says:

      Get out of the UN and remove the UN from American soil.

    37. Peter Woodcock says:

      Dear Amy and fellow skeptics, I have just finished a brilliant book which clearly outlines the false science behind this "religion" of "climate change". Titled " Climate: The Counter Consensus" by Professor Robert Carter – Stacey Publications. Well worth reading as it provides scientific arguments to counter the arguments that the believers at Doha would like us to adopt. I agree, this Conference was an absolute waste of money, yet I live in a country called Australia that has adopted the socialist solution of imposing a "carbon tax" [another lie] which is simply a mechanism for re-distributing wealth whilst failing to abate a single tonne of CO2.

    38. rulken russell says:

      Just one more good reason to kick the UN out of the USA, and get the USA out of the UN.

    39. quentin felidck says:

      Cllimate change is an evolving process that has seen dramatic changes for many billions of years, and will probably continue to change in the future. Evidence of pallm trees have been found in the artic and glacier's in Ohio.When the carpet baggers and hucksters can figure out how to stop continental shift, volcanos, earth quake. How they can control the temperature of the sun without turning it into a white dwarf or a nova then they may have a chance of talking to mother nature about keeping the planet static.

    40. Bright Knight says:

      Although Schaefe and Loris are right with their message, that the U.S. should stop wasting millions of taxpayer dollars attending and financing these conferences, they still are on the "Global Warming"-trip (worse: even on the man-made Global Warming trip):

      2 quotes from the post:
      "Instead of continuing this futile exercise, the U.S. should pursue more serious steps on its own"

      and

      "Work with a smaller group of nations through informal arrangements such as the Major Economies Forum to undertake appropriate steps that are both cost effective and effective in reducing warming."

      a) there IS NO global warming – since app. 16 years! In fact, we might see a cooling
      b) even if we would see a warming, it would not be man-made. We have climate change since this planet exists and we will have climate change in future. We had much warmer periods (even without any industry, cars, airplanes and much less population) and we had cooler periods in the past and we will have them again in future.

    41. John says:

      It is obvious that this organization has out lived it usefulness. Time to drop it and move on.

    42. Rip says:

      Revelation 16:9 NIV
      They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him.

    43. John Smith says:

      I can use "grade school" fluid dynamics to create a model of what would actually happen with a warming planet under any situation:

      1. The storms would decrease, not increase. This decrease would specifically happen around the equator and surrounding areas. This is due to inadequate power generated from weak cold fronts.

      2. The rest of the globe would simply see the weather conditions "migrate" toward the poles. This is because the average seasonal temperatures would increase, simulating weather conditions that are usually found closer to the equator.

      My conclusion is that these recent violent storms is a result of the earth's cooling, which it has been doing for the past several years, according to what I have read. Take Sandy, for example; it's main fuel was not heat, but rather a large cold front that hit the normal tropical air, causing the warm and cold clash that generates a severe storm. Add the extra storm pattern that came from the side and you get a monster of a storm.

      I seriously think that the big scientists who promote this nonsense needs to go back to elementary school and relearn some science. In the mean time, I find it sad that we have to be punished for this when we are the role model of all this 'green stuff' in the first place.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×