Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 557 (Executive Calendar)

Text in the Record

Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 557

Mr. President, I am here today because there is the simple fact that climate change is real. Earlier this year, I came to the floor and asked my colleagues to agree on that simple, known, scientific fact. Well, they could not. So I returned to the floor several times in the hopes that my Republican colleagues could at least agree to some of the simple truths that make up the bigger picture of the reality of climate change. I asked if we could agree that oceans are warming, that sea levels are rising, or that the economic harms of climate change are already beginning to hit and will only get worse going forward. Every time, Republicans objected. I do, however, persist. Today's simple truth is this: Climate change portends a cascade of financial market collapses that could destabilize the national and global economies. My question today is, Can we all agree on that? Well, here is my evidence: We know that climate change makes many natural disasters more frequent and/or--could be either--more extreme, including hurricanes, floods, and wildfires--the same wildfires that blanketed much of the Midwest, Northeast, and Mid-Atlantic in smoke just last week, resulting in American cities like Chicago, Detroit, New York, and Washington having the worst air quality in the world--worse than cities in India, worse than cities in China. We know that these disasters are expensive. Between 1980 and today, U.S. losses from billion-dollar climate disasters totaled over $3.1 trillion adjusted for inflation--$3.1 trillion lost to Americans. And, of course, that only accounts for the 431 disasters that cost over $1 billion each. There are plenty more harms beyond that $3.1 trillion. The trend is projected to continue. Modelers for Deloitte, the corporate consultancy, project that unchecked climate change could cost the global economy $178 trillion--$178 trillion U.S. dollars--in the period between 2021 and 2070. The U.S. economy is in here as a $36 trillion hit in net present value across that half-century span. Deloitte's modelers also predict a global GDP decrease of around 7.6 percent by 2070. Other financial experts have warned that worldwide GDP per capita, GDP divided by population, could decline by close to 20 percent within the next three decades. Indeed, in 2023, the now-Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney, who had previously served as the governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, testified before the Senate Budget Committee that ``estimates suggest that, over the balance of this century, climate change could reduce the level of global GDP per capita by 10-20 [percent] without efforts to limit warming, the equivalent of a decade of no economic growth.'' He said, ``Similar estimates have been found for the United States''--very like Deloitte's projection for the Americas. So that is climate risk. Now let's look at what it means for financial

[[Page S4176]]

risk. An international network of major banks and bank supervisors, including the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, Deutsche Bundesbank Bank, and the Bank of England, used this illustration about how climate risk hits financial risk. The direct economic impacts include tanking property values and lower household wealth. Tanking property values and lower household wealth then snowball from individual and family impacts into systemic impacts to the financial system at large. This means that climate change could ultimately cause ``the next systemic financial crisis.'' Financial experts all over the world agree. Dr. Benjamin Keys, professor of finance at the Wharton School, testified before the Senate Budget Committee as follows:

[C]limate risk . . . is simultaneously inducing heightened risk of flood, storm damage, chronic inundation, drought, excessive heat, and wildfires. . . . [T]here is no avoiding the fact that the increasing risk of large, global loss events will mean higher costs for consumers.

Dr. Sean Becketti, former chief economist at mortgage giant Freddie Mac, warned of rising sea levels and flooding triggering large-scale reduction of coastal property values, resulting in an economic shock akin to the 2008 financial crisis--and with no expectation that the assets would recover their value. Those warnings of Dr. Becketti were based only on the risks of what he called ``coastal property value crash,'' not on the growing wildfire threat that is creating a similar insurance death spiral out West. Specifically, Dr. Becketti testified:

You look at the Housing Crisis of 2007/8, it was a long time before property values came back, but they did come back. This is a different type of dynamic where property values are probably physically not able to come back. And so this is equity that's lost forever. It's extremely difficult to estimate nationally--I'm not sure I have enough zeros to do it.

Fed Chair Jerome Powell testified before the Senate Banking Committee in this Congress that in 10 to 15 years, it will be impossible to get insurance or a mortgage in certain coastal and fire-prone regions of the country. Imagine what happens to the economy in a region in which insurance and mortgages are no longer available. It is global as well. The international Financial Stability Board has warned of the cascade of harms: from rising climate risk to increased insurance premiums and reduced coverage, to market withdrawal of insurance, causing a danger of mortgage crises and bank insolvencies. The warning to the international banking system: Buckle up. The Economist magazine described a possible $25 trillion hit to global real estate markets. That is the kind of thing that is bad for bank solvency and that attracted the attention of the international Financial Stability Board. While these impacts are global, they will hit home. As Dr. Bill Frist, former Republican Senate majority leader, testified:

Climate change is an economic issue. It affects individuals, families, and businesses of all sizes. The fallout from climate change--from increased droughts and flooding to hotter temperatures and rising sea levels--costs the United States billions of dollars every year.

Just yesterday, this article--which I ask unanimous consent that the article be printed in the Record and appended to my remarks--from Alistair Marsh entitled ``Pension Funds Try to Come to Grips With the Scariest Global Warming Scenario,'' in Bloomberg News, quotes an investment research chief at the $300 billion UK retirement assets corporation Standard Life, a company that has been around for 200 years.

Any investors not thinking seriously about such risks by mid-2028 would ``really be out of the mainstream.''

This is a mainstream concern. Closer to home, JPMorgan has described the impact of any single climate tipping point--and we are approaching several--any single tipping point being breached as ``highly consequential'' for investors. We are not helpless in the face of these warnings. Financial experts and banks who look at this professionally agree that adjusting to our climate reality by organizing an early and orderly transition to a low carbon economy will avoid costly shocks to the system when a transition away from fossil fuel-related assets becomes necessary. It is a little bit like landing a plane. If you do it gradually, it is much safer and smoother. If you crash, it can be pretty painful. So this is a simple truth. It is well documented. We have been warned and warned and warned. Unchecked climate change will cascade into danger to the national and global economy. So I ask: Can we all agree on that? There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

Showing the first 12 paragraphs. The full remarks are in the Record.

Read the full remarks in the Record (opens in a new tab)