By Erick Erickson

The Paris Agreement would also handicap America in the global race for new sources of energy. Russia has committed financial and military assets to the Arctic to stake its claim to the region’s vast deepwater mineral, oil and gas deposits. China is also exploring and trading for Arctic oil and gas. Meanwhile, American liquefied natural gas struggles with logistical costs that weaken its competitiveness.

By allowing our rivals to increase their cooperation and strategic leverage around the world — pressuring our allies and partners, harming domestic job creators and materially reducing our prestige and influence in the process — the agreement would damage America’s national security as much as our economic security. The emission cuts that the US would have to make today, and the resultant costs for our own energy firms, would weaken our ability to battle our rivals on an equal footing in the drive for untapped energy sources.

He also notes the agreement would have a negligible impact on temperature.

What’s more, from my vantage point, the Paris Accord is dangerous because of the precedent it sets. It would allow the President to fundamentally alter our economy without congressional approval. Yes, Presidents enter executive agreements all the time for cooperation. But the outcome of the Paris agreement on climate change would have direct economic consequences and congress was not consulted.

As long as President Trump remains in the agreement, a future President to re-activiate it even if President Trump did nothing. Withdrawal is the only safe act.