Note: It’s best to add to or modify the script below to personalize if possible. You could: 1) include specific effects of climate change that have affected you, loved ones or friends, 2) say what public health or environmental impacts concern you the most, and/or 3) mention impacts to future generations that you are concerned about.
Hi, my name is [NAME] and I’m a constituent from [CITY, ZIP].
I am very concerned about the real consequences of human-caused climate change that I see in the communities around me - floods, fires, droughts and asthma and other health problems. Please oppose HR 3117, the so-called Transparency and Honesty in Energy Regulations Act. HR 3117 would severely impede efforts to address climate change by reducing federal agencies’ abilities to consider the social cost of carbon when developing measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The real social cost of carbon is critical to reducing climate impacts, and we cannot afford to wait to take strong action.
Thank you for your time and attention.
[If leaving a voicemail, leave your full street address to ensure your call is tallied]
Tell Representatives to oppose HR 3117, which would prevent federal agencies from addressing climate change. This bill has been ordered reported out of committee in the House.
The social cost of carbon (SCC) is used in analyzing the costs and benefits of potential federal rules to address climate change. It has been called the “most important number you’ve never heard of.” The SCC takes into consideration the environmental and public health consequences of increased greenhouse gas pollution and the benefits of reducing those emissions. Benefits include fewer and less extreme heat waves, droughts and hurricanes; reduced species loss; lower sea-level rise; and fewer asthma attacks, emergency room visits, premature deaths and lost work or school days.
The SCC is critical to the cost-benefit justification for federal action on climate change. Reducing or eliminating the use of the SCC in cost-benefit analyses would impede the Environmental Protection Agency, the Energy Department, the Council on Environmental Quality and the Interior Department from implementing meaningful requirements to reduce greenhouse gases.
The current administration is already implementing policies to prevent agencies from fully valuing the benefits of addressing climate change. Those policies could be reversed under a future administration. However, HR 3117 would prohibit or severely limit by law the use of the SCC and could be more difficult to reverse. The goal of HR 3117 is to undercut action on climate change by making the costs of lowering emissions appear to be much higher than the monetary value of reducing emissions. Among other things, the bill would give more value to benefits enjoyed by the population alive today, and less value to benefits for future generations. It would disallow consideration of the global benefits of lowering US greenhouse gas pollution. The limitations imposed by HR 3117 are likely to lower the value of reducing greenhouse gas pollution by 70-95%, which would effectively prevent emission-reducing safeguards from ever becoming law.