Letters: House bill unnecessary; Kyoto agreement not yet official

Mary J. Feldman's letter (July 19) decries a rider to the House's Environmental Protection Agency funding bill, which would forestall agency implementation of provisions called for by the Kyoto agreement. She could better spend time reading the Constitution, most particularly the section dealing with treaty approval.

A treaty negotiated by the executive branch does not attain force of law until approved by a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Until such approval is voted, it is any attempt to implement said treaty that is "sneaky and underhanded" -- not to mention illegal.

But, she argues, it's only "education" that the appropriations rider seeks to deny. Isn't it funny how "gag the EPA" equates to "stop EPA propaganda," depending on whose ox is being gored?

Regardless of how one feels about the Kyoto protocol (and, as may be clear, I disagree with Feldman's view), the fact remains that the administration has not yet even formally requested a vote.

Whether this is because they don't think they have the votes, or because they figure they can slip most of it through without Senate approval, is only a matter of conjecture.

What is not is that until such approval is voted, Kyoto is no more a matter of public policy than is an agreement between President Clinton and Brian Greenspun to play golf the next time they meet.

Bob Ashman

archive