Senator James Inhofe responded positively to reports of voluntary initiatives by private businesses to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. He said these initiatives demonstrate that government controls on carbon dioxide emissions are unnecessary and support the Bush Administration's rejection of mandatory schemes like the Kyoto Protocol. However, Inhofe expressed concern that these private initiatives could pave the way for future government regulation of carbon dioxide. He said Congress should not interpret these initiatives as an invitation to impose mandatory caps or carbon trading markets.

1. 2i4 Ms
S t Pagel1 of2
RECORD TYPE: FEDERAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR:Marlo Lewis <cmlewis~cei-org>
(Mario Lewis <Mlewis~cei~org>
[UNKNN 3
CREATION DATE/TIME:17.JAN
2 003 08:49:31.00
SUBJECT:: RE: INHOFE ON VOLUNTARY CLIMATE
INITIATIVES
TO:Chris Horner <chorrler~cei.org>
( Chris Homner <chorner~cei~org>[
READ :UNKNOWN UNKNOWN
TO:iack.victory~mail.house~gov
j ack.victory~mail~house~go
READ :UNKNOWN [UNKNOWN
TO:larry.boggs~corporate~ge~c
( larry.boggs~corporate~ge~c
READ :UNKNOWN fUNKNOWN
TO:mmckenna~dutkogroup~co
mmckenna~dutkogroup~com
READ :UNKNOWN 0 UNKNOWN
TO:nschulz~techcentralstatio.
o ( nschulz(3techcentralstation
READ: UNKNOWN [oUNKNOWN I
TO:sbrown~dutkogroup~com
( sbrown~dutkogroup~com [ OAI
READ :UNKNOWN
TOsea~rcpt~o
C ssglbacpt~o [ UNKNOWN I
READ :UNKNOWN
TO:george O'connor <gog
ocno cagsnaegv
READ :UNKNOWN george o'connor <george
o'co
TO:dan.skopec~mail house
go dan.skopec~mail house
READ :UNKNOWNUNOW gov UNOW
TO:joe~rpum cornm joe~rpum.com
READ: UNKNOWN
ONDCP I
TO:Myron Ebell <mebelli~cei~org>C
Myron Ebell <mebell~cei.org>
READ: UNKNOWN UNKNOWN I
TO:jrnarks~narn org j marks~nam.org
READ: UNKNOWN
[UNKNOWN
TO:ray. fitzgerald~rmail.house.gov(
ray. fitzgerald~~mail.house.gov
READ: UNKNOWN UNKNOWN I)
TO:scott.rayder~noaa~gov
scott.rayder~noaa~gov
READ :UNKNOWN UNKNOWN I)
TO:Samnuel A. Thernstrom
CN=Samuel A. Thernstromn/OU=CEQ/O=EOP@EOP
READ: UNKNOWN CEQ I)
TO:Michael Catanzaro <Micael-Catanzaro~epw.senate~gov>(
READ :UNKNOWN Michael Catanzaro <Michael
TEXT:
Bravo! This is perfect.
-- Mario
Oiginal Message ---
-Or-
file:/D:search_7_11_O 5 ceq 10 024
fyr33d003_ceq.txt
7/28/2005

2. Page 2of 2
From: Michael Catanzaro [mailto:Michael Catanzaro~epw.senate.gov]
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 2:44 PM
To: gog o'connor; sthernst~ceq.eop.gov; ssegal~bracepatt.com;
scott .rayder~noaa .gov; sbrown~dutkogroup. corn;
ray. fitzgerald~mail .house.gov; nschulz~techcentralstation.com;
jmarks~nam.org; mnmckenna~dutkogroup.com; Marlo Lewis; Myron Ebell;
larry.boggsgcorporate.ge.comf; joe~rpumn.com; jack.victory~mail .house.gov;
dan. skopec~mail .house.gov; Chris Horner
Subject: INH-OFE ON VOLUNTARY CLIMATE INITIATIVES
For Immediate Release Contact: Mike Catanzaro
(202) 224-5762
January 16, 2003
INHOFE SAYS VOLUNTARY CLIMATE INITIATIVES
PROVE GOVERNMENT MANDATES ARE UNNECESSARY
Washington, D.C.-Sen. James Inhofe, chairman of the Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee, responded today to media reports on voluntary
initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions:
"The effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through voluntary programs
is one
of the innovative ways private business is addressing climate change.4
Among
other things, it demonstrates that government controls on carbon dioxide
emissions-whether through explicit mandatory caps or other programs
imposed by4
bureaucrats-are unnecessary.
The Bush Administration rightly rejected mandatory schemes to reduce carbon
dioxide emissions, such as the Kyoto Protocol, that would have devastated4
the
U.S. economy. It has taken the right approach by supporting voluntary
initiatives over government mandates.
I am concerned, however, that these private sector initiatives may pave
the way
for government regulation of carbon dioxide in the future. Congress
should not4
interpret these initiatives as an invitation to impose mandatory caps or to
artificially create carbon-trading markets.
In addition, industry should keep these arrangements private, and avoid4
seeking
government regulation at some future date that would benefit a few large
companies at the expense of economic growth and energy security."
file://D:search_7_11 05 ceq_10024_f yr33dOO3 ceq.txt 7/28/2005