A Quote by Fred Upton

Without international participation, jobs and emissions will simply shift overseas to countries that require few, if any, environmental protections, harming the global environment as well as the U.S. economy.
Many countries - as well as cities, states and provinces - are taking global warming seriously and are working to reduce emissions and shift to cleaner energy sources.
Are we better off if we displace jobs and investments to other countries and global emissions go up? I say no. Let's bring that production here and have less emissions globally because we can make things more efficiently and cleaner.
Our global atmosphere does not respect national boundaries, and the international commitments under the Paris Agreement cannot be met without the full cooperation and participation of multiple countries.
The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred, principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured of environmental security.
Historically, international law lent a measure of legality to the colonial system, and allowed the West to set the rules for participation as a sovereign state on a global level. It also protected the interests of foreign investment in countries of the global South even when these were exploitative, and deprived countries of the benefits of resources situated within their territories.
Global actions require local and national participation. International cooperation and action requires community perspectives and legitimacy if it is to be effective.
A truly global economy, as opposed to the multinational economy of the recent past, will require concessions of national power ... that seemed impossible a few years ago and which even now we can but partly imagine.
I would say ... that moving jobs overseas is a reality of global competition, ... If you come from Pennsylvania, we've lost a lot of jobs from global competition. I think that's just a truth, if you will.
As I have said all along, for any trade promotion authority bill to gain my support, it must require strong, enforceable environmental and labor protections.
If we start thinking simply nationally, and we start having policies that try and restrict the benefits only within our borders, and try and implement protectionist measures as a consequence, this will not have the effect we need to have on the global economy. And that's ultimately the global economy that's pulling most of us down, particularly countries like Canada, that aren't the source of these current economic troubles.
In the quest for comparative advantage, investment will flow towards those countries that can offer more output for fewer emissions. Inaction will cost jobs. Action will support jobs.
What we can do is to shape how that process of global integration proceeds, so that it's increasing opportunity for ordinary people, so that it's creating better jobs, so that we are strengthening protections for workers, so that we are addressing some of the environmental challenges that come with rapid growth.
Yet in this global economy, no jobs are safe. High-speed Internet connections and low-cost, skilled labor overseas are an explosive combination.
In this global economy, no jobs are safe. High-speed Internet connections and low-cost, skilled labor overseas are an explosive combination.
Outsourcing American jobs will prove to be a plus for the economy in the long run. It's simply a new way of doing international trade.
If we don't start with rapid emissions reductions and substantial emissions reductions, then we will pass a danger point, beyond which the consequences for many people and countries on Earth will simply become unacceptable and eventually disastrous.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!