The White House would have us believe that the president is unfazed by the midterm election debacle. There is plenty of coverage of President Obama’s upcoming unilateral actions on immigration and his yawner of an announcement of a non-binding agreement on global warming with the Chinese, but another executive overreach may be about to take place that will do a lot to reinforce voters’ reasons for voting against the Democrats and emphasize the notion that the president doesn’t get it. The New York Times revealed today that the president is about to announce that three billion dollars of U.S. taxpayer money will be given to other countries to help “the world’s poorest adapt to the ravages of climate change.”


The Democrats love to taunt Republicans about not “getting” the science of climate change. Well, if the president goes through with his plan to hand billions to foreign countries as part of his global warming crusade, he will be getting another lesson in the political science of foolishly wasting American tax dollars on climate change, an issue many Americans don’t really care about.

The new Republican majorities in the House and Senate could seize on this latest blatant tone-deaf overreach and use it to build serious opposition to the Democrats’ dream of a wealth transfer from America to who knows where.  Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) already said the president’s agreement with the Chinese “is the latest example of the president’s crusade against affordable, reliable energy that is already hurting jobs and squeezing middle-class families.” Republicans in the House and Senate are going to be focused on passing the Keystone XL Pipeline, rolling back onerous EPA regulations and increasing American energy security in the 114th Congress – not on helping the president raise Americans’ power bills and sending money we don’t have to foreign lands.  I would love to see a poll on whether or not American voters think we should borrow money from the Chinese to send to remote places around the globe to fight “global warming.”

Remarkably, another quote from the New York Times article reveals a threat to the United States.  The authors quote Rachel Kyte, World Bank Group Vice President and Special Envoy for Climate Change, as saying, “Put money on the table and we’ll talk; if you don’t put money on the table then we’ll walk.” I’m sorry, you want America to pay you for what? Apparently, Ms. Kyte and others believe the global warming alarmists who say certain countries face extinction because of climate change. Are they threatening to storm out of the room and just allow themselves to drown in the rising tides if we don’t offer them enough money from American taxpayers? Well, that would show greedy Americans a thing or two. It is just surreal. And, oh by the way, this brilliant idea that Americans should pay for a global warming solution for other countries is not championed by a real scientist.  Ms. Kyte is British, a college professor and a bureaucrat with a degree in politics from the University of London.  Sounds tailor-made for the Obama worldview.

Basically, even before asking questions about how these countries are spending their current treasure, President Obama wants us to sign on to send our hard-earned money overseas to fight climate change. If climate change is upon us, why don’t we spend American money in Mobile before we send it to Mauritius?

Let Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Speaker Boehner and company get their hands on this. There should be votes in both Houses to establish a clear record and to let members of Congress be heard on the question of whether or not we should be using the U.S. Treasury to finance Obama and the Democrats’ fantasies of fighting global warming. We can only imagine what the money would actually be used for. Luckily, we will probably only be left with imagining, because there is zero chance that a crackpot plan like this will pass in today’s Congress. Elections have consequences.

Follow Ed on Twitter: @EdRogersDC