A Christmas Poem
The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light, I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight. My wife was asleep, her head on my chest, My daughter beside me, angelic in rest Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white, transforming the yard to a winter delight.
The sparkling lights in the tree I believe, Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep, Secure and surrounded by love, I would sleep, In perfect contentment, or so it would seem, So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.
The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near, But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear. Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know,
Then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow. My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear, And I crept to the door just to see who was near.
Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night, A lone figure stood his face weary and tight. A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old, Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold. Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled, Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.
"What are you doing?" I asked without fear, "Come in this moment, it's freezing out here! Put down your pack; brush the snow from your sleeve, You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!" For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift, Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts,
To the window that danced with a warm fire's light. Then he sighed and he said "Its really all right, I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night."
"It's my duty to stand at the front of the line, That separates you from the darkest of times.
No one had to ask or beg or implore, I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before. My Gramps died at Pearl on a day in December." Then he sighed, "That's a Christmas Gram always remembers."
"My dad stood his watch in the jungles of ' Nam ', And now it is my turn and so, here I am.
I've not seen my own son in more than a while, But my wife sends me pictures; he's sure got her smile." Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag, The red, white, and blue... an American flag.
"I can live through the cold and the being alone, Away from my family, my house and my home
I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet, I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat. I can carry the weight of killing another, Or lay down my life for my sister or brother, Who stand at the front against any and all To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall."
"So go back inside," he said, "Harbor no fright, Your family is waiting and I'll be all right." "But isn't there something I can do, at the least? Give you money," I asked, "Or prepare you a feast? It seems all too little for all that you've done, for being away from your wife and your son."
Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret, "Just tell us you love us, and never forget To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone, To stand your own watch, no matter how long For when we come home, either standing or dead, To know you remember we fought and we bled Is payment enough, and with that we will trust, that we mattered to you as you mattered to us."

Our Lord's Prayer

OUR LORD'S PRAYER The moment you receive it, say:
Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven, give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.. For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory now and forever Amen.

GOD WANTED ME TO TELL YOU, It shall be well with you this coming year.. No matter how much your enemies try this year, they will not succeed. You have been destined to make it and you shall surely achieve all your goals this year... For the remainder of 2009, all your agonies will be diverted and victory and prosperity will be incoming in abundance. Today, God has confirmed the end of your sufferings, sorrows and pain because HE that sits on the throne has remembered you. He has taken away the hardships and given you JOY. He will never let you down. I knocked at heaven's door this morning, God asked me....My child! What can I do for you? And I said, 'Father, please protect and bless the person reading this message... '

In God We Trust

President Barack Obama said in Turkey : "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values." I found this very interesting. Do you know the Preamble for your state? . . Be sure to read the message at the bottom!
Alabama 1901, Preamble We the people of the State of Alabama , invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution..
Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska , grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.
Arizona 1911, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arizona , grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...
Arkansas 1874, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arkansas , grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...
California 1879, Preamble We, the People of the State of California , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom...
Colorado 1876, Preamble We, the people of Colorado , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe... Connecticut 1818, Preamble.
The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.
Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences...
Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida , grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution...
Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia , relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...
Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii , Grateful for Divine Guidance .... Establish this Constitution.
Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings..
Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana , grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.
Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa , grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution.
Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.
Kentucky 1891, Preamble.. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties..
Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana , grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.
Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity .. And imploring His aid and direction.
Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...
Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We...the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction
Michigan 1908, Preamble.. We, the people of the State of Michigan , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution.
Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:
Mississippi 1890, Preamble We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.
Missouri 1845, Preamble We, the people of Missouri , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness . Establish this Constitution...
Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution ..
Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom . Establish this Constitution.
Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution...
New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.
New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty..
New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.
North Carol ina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carol ina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those...
North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...
Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common.
Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty,
establish this Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences
Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance......
Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing...
South Carol ina , 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carol ina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties ....
Tennessee 1796, Art. XI..III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...
Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas , acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.
Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.
Vermont 1777, Preamble Whereas all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man ..
Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other
Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution
West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God ..
Wisconsin 1848, Preamble We, the people of Wisconsin , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility...
Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming , grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution....

After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, the ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong! If you found this to be 'Food for thought' send to as many as you think will be enlightened as I hope you were. (Please note that at no time is anyone told that they MUST worship God.) GOD BLESS AMERICA !!!!!!!!!!!!!

And Live free or Die Trying

Another Failed Presidency

Another Failed Presidency By Geoffrey P. Hunt Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson. In the modern era, we've seen several failed presidencies--led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait-- they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out. Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China. George Bush Jr didn't fail so much as he was perceived to have been too much of a patrician while being uncomfortable with his more conservative allies. Yet George Bush Sr is still perceived as a man of uncommon decency, loyal to the enduring American character of rugged self-determination, free markets, and generosity. George W will eventually be treated more kindly by historians as one whose potential was squashed by his own compromise of conservative principles, in some ways repeating the mistakes of his father, while ignoring many lessons in executive leadership he should have learned at Harvard Business School. Of course George W could never quite overcome being dogged from the outset by half of the nation convinced he was electorally illegitimate -- thus aiding the resurgence of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame. But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on? No narrative. Obama doesn't have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn't connect with us. He doesn't have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don't align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, Reagan. But not this president. It's not so much that he's a phony, knows nothing about economics, is historically illiterate, and woefully small minded for the size of the task-- all contributory of course. It's that he's not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn't command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don't add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience. In the meantime, while we've been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he's dissed just about every one of us--financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012: "For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn't give me enough time; if only I'd had a second term, I could have offended you too." Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state--staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there's always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that. Yes, small presidents do fail, Barack Obama among them. The coyotes howl but the wagon train keeps rolling along. [editor's note: The author is not the not the same person as Geoffrey P Hunt, who works at the Institute for Scientific Analysis as a senior research scientist.]

The SERMON GEN. 47:13-27

RECENT VIRGINIA CHURCH SERVICE -STIMULUS SERMON Gen 47:13-27Good morning, brothers and sisters; it's always a delight to see the pewscrowded on Sunday morning, and so eager to get into God's Word. Turn withme in your Bibles, if you will to the 47th chapter of Genesis, we'll beginour reading at verse 13, and go through verse 27.Brother Ray, would you stand and read that great passage for us?....(reading)...Thank you for that fine reading, Brother Ray.... So we see that economichard times fell upon Egypt , and the people turned to the government ofPharaoh to deal with this for them. And Pharaoh nationalized the grainharvest, and placed the grain in great storehouses that he had built. Sothe people brought their money to Pharaoh, like a great tax increase, andgave it all to him willingly in return for grain. And this went on untiltheir money ran out, and they were hungry again.So when they went to Pharaoh after that, they brought their livestock -theircattle, their horses, their sheep, and their donkey - to barter for grain,and verse 17 says that only took them through the end of that year..But the famine wasn't over, was it? So the next year, the people came before Pharaoh and admitted they hadnothing left, except their land and their own lives. "There is nothing leftin the sight of my lord but our bodies and our land. Why should we diebefore your eyes, both we and our land? Buy us and our land for food, andwe with our land will be servants to Pharaoh." So they surrendered theirhomes, their land, and their real estate to Pharaoh's government, and thensold themselves into slavery to him, in return for grain. What can we learnfrom this, brothers and sisters?That turning to the government instead of to God to be our provider in hardtimes only leads to slavery? Yes. That the only reason government wantsto be our provider is to also become our master? Yes.But look how that passage ends, brothers and sisters! Thus Israel settledin the land of Egypt , in the land of Goshen . And they gained possessionsin it, and were fruitful and multiplied greatly." God provided for Hispeople, just as always has! They didn't end up giving all their possessionsto government, no, it says they gained possessions!But I also tell you a great truth today, and an ominous one. We see thesame thing happening today - the government today wants to "share the wealth"once again, to take it from us and redistribute it back to us. It wants totake control of healthcare, just as it has taken control of education, andration it back to us, and when government rations it, then governmentdecides who gets it, and how much, and what kind. And if we go along withit, and do it willingly, then we will wind up no differently than the peopleof Egypt did four thousand years ago - as slaves to the government, and asslaves to our leaders.What Mr. Obama's government is doing now is no different from what Pharaoh'sgovernment did then, and it will end the same. And a lot of people like tocall Mr. Obama a "Messiah," don't they? Is he a Messiah? A savior? Didn'tthe Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, "You have saved ourlives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh"?Well, I tell you this - I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend ofmine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obamais a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.Bow with me in prayer, if you will.Lord, You alone are worthy to be served, and we rely on You, and You alone.We confess that the government is not our deliverer, and never rightly willbe. We read in the eighth chapter of 1 Samuel, when Samuel warned thepeople of what a ruler would do, where it says "And in that day you will cryout because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORDwill not answer you in that day." And Lord, we acknowledge that day hascome. We cry out to you because of the ruler that we have chosen forourselves as a nation. Lord, we pray for this nation. We pray forrevival, and we pray for deliverance from those who would be our masters.Give us hearts to seek You and hands to serve You, and protect Your peoplefrom the atrocities of Pharaoh's government.In God We Trust...

Abstract: In December, the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will meet in Copenhagen to work on a successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol. U.S. negotiators should refuse to sign any climate change treaty that does not include meaningful participation by China, India, and other major developing nations or that would harm the U.S. economy or threaten U.S. sovereignty.The 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will be held in Copenhagen in December. It is the most important international conference on global warming since the 1997 Kyoto conference that produced the Kyoto Protocol. As the U.S. and other delegations prepare for this conference, the American people need to know that, in addition to harming the U.S. economically and environmentally, a new global warming treaty would threaten U.S. sovereignty.Why Is the Copenhagen Conference Important?The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which went into effect in 2005, is the major global warming treaty currently in force. Under the treaty, the nations of Europe as well as Japan, Canada, and most other developed countries committed themselves to reducing greenhouse gas emissions -- chiefly carbon dioxide from fossil fuels -- which are blamed for global warming. Generally, these nations are supposed to reduce emissions by 5 percent below 1990 baseline levels by 2012. The U.S. has not ratified the treaty. China, India, and other developing nations have ratified it, but are exempted from any obligation to reduce emissions. Notwithstanding questions about the seriousness of global warming, the Kyoto Protocol has failed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and has had no effect on global warming.Because the Kyoto Protocol's provisions will expire in 2012, Kyoto proponents have identified the Copenhagen conference as the critical meeting for extending and expanding the treaty's targets and timetables beyond 2012. Copenhagen is also seen, especially by Europeans, as an opportunity to force the U.S. to join the other developed countries required to reduce emissions. Hopes of achieving this end rose considerably when President Barack Obama took office. The President will be under pressure to keep his promises to reduce America's greenhouse gas emissions.What Will Be Different in Copenhagen?The representatives of the nations that signed the Kyoto Protocol and who see it as a success that should be extended have long identified Copenhagen as crucial to the future of global warming policy. Their main objective is to expand the emissions reduction targets set in Kyoto. They also seek to make these stringent targets binding, verifiable, and enforceable and to apply them to the U.S. for the first time. They hope to achieve more meaningful participation from the developing world. However, these goals will make it difficult for many individual nations to agree to any treaty in Copenhagen.U.S. negotiators should stand firm in protecting American interests and not sign any treaty just for the sake of signing a treaty.Is the Kyoto Protocol Worth Extending?No. Even aside from the growing doubts about the seriousness of the global warming threat -- the Kyoto Protocol or any other putative global warming solution is only a solution to the extent that a genuine problem exists in the first place -- the Kyoto Protocol has failed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.[1] Emissions are increasing in several signatory nations. In several more countries, emissions are declining more slowly than emissions in the U.S., which ironically is not a party to Kyoto.[2]For example, according to U.N. data, the U.S. reduced emissions by 3 percent from 2000 to 2006, while the 27 European signatories increased their emissions by 0.1 percent.[3] Germany's emissions declined by only 1.7 percent, while Canada's emissions rose 21.3 percent.[4] European Environmental Agency data show that emissions increased in Austria, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain in the decade after the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.[5]One key reason for compliance difficulties in Europe has been the tremendous cost of reducing emissions, estimated at $67.75 billion to $170.84 billion through 2008.[6] Despite these high costs for their inadequate efforts to reduce emissions, these European nations claim to want to enact much tougher targets in Copenhagen. Further, Kyoto's exemption for developing nations has proven a far greater oversight than originally believed because these emissions, especially from China, have increased far faster than had been anticipated in 1997. For example, the Senate Byrd-Hagel Resolution warned that developing-nation emissions would exceed those of the developed world "as early as 2015."[7] According to the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration, it happened in 2005.[8]Was the U.S. Correct to Stay out of Kyoto?Yes. The U.S. was correct to refuse to participate in this demonstrated failure, particularly because it would have damaged the U.S. economy. An analysis by the Energy Information Administration put the cost of U.S. compliance at up to $400 billion annually.[9]Beyond the high costs, the Kyoto Protocol has no effective enforcement mechanism: Nothing has happened or will happen to the developed nations that are not in compliance, and developing nations have no obligations. However, U.S. law is unique in that a ratified treaty can have the same status as domestic legislation. Thus, unlike the rest of the world, American businesses would have been forced to comply with U.S. obligations under the Kyoto Protocol.In fact, the U.S. Senate recognized the pitfalls of this approach even before the Kyoto Protocol. The 1997 Byrd-Hagel resolution, which passed 95-0, warned the Clinton Administration not to sign any treaty that exempted the developing world or would harm the U.S. economy. The resolution clearly stated that the Senate would not ratify any such treaty.[10] The subsequent Kyoto Protocol violated both conditions, which is why the President never submitted the treaty to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification.The Senate's guidelines remain a policy that the Obama Administration should follow in Copenhagen. Given that emissions from developing nations are increasing far faster than emissions in the developed world and that no nation has found a way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions without incurring serious economic harm, the Administration should firmly adhere to these guidelines during the negotiations in Copenhagen.What Are the Economic Concerns?The goal of the Kyoto Protocol, the building block for Copenhagen, is similar to the purpose of the Waxman-Markey global warming bill, which narrowly passed the U.S. House of Representatives in June, and of the Kerry-Boxer bill being considered in the U.S. Senate. All three would set limits on emissions from fossil fuels -- the coal, oil, and natural gas that provide America with 85 percent of its energy. Such limits would act as a large energy tax, driving up the energy costs of individuals and consumers, forcing them to use less energy. More stringent emissions targets would require even larger increases in fossil energy prices to further discourage their use.A Heritage Foundation analysis of Waxman-Markey found that this energy tax would have serious implications throughout the economy. For a household of four, energy costs (electric, natural gas, gasoline expenses) would rise by $436 in 2012 and by $1,241 by 2035, averaging $829 over that period.[11] Higher energy costs would increase the cost of many other products and services. Overall, Waxman-Markey would reduce gross domestic product by $393 billion annually and by a total of $9.4 trillion by 2035.[12] An initial analysis of the Senate bill finds comparable costs.[13]Beyond the increased costs imposed on individuals and households, the Waxman-Markey bill would reduce employment, especially in the manufacturing sector. The Heritage analysis estimates that net job losses would exceed 1 million on average annually through 2035,[14] even after accounting for the overhyped green jobs. Analyses from the Brookings Institution, National Black Chamber of Commerce, and other institutions found roughly comparable effects.[15]Assuming proponents of a Copenhagen treaty want targets at least as stringent as those in the Waxman-Markey bill -- a 17 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 baseline levels in 2020 up to an 83 percent reduction by 2050 -- U.S. compliance costs would be similarly high.Would the Environmental Benefits Be Worth It?No. First, there are growing doubts about whether global warming really is the crisis it was claimed to be heading into the 1997 Kyoto negotiations.[16] For example, global temperatures have leveled off since then.[17] However, putting the scientific doubts aside for a moment, the Kyoto approach seems unlikely to slow global warming effectively. One scientific study estimated that, even if the treaty reached its targeted emissions reductions, it would reduce the earth's future temperature by about 0.07 degree Celsius by 2050 -- an amount too small to make any difference and impossible to verify because natural variability is far greater.[18] Obviously, more stringent targets at Copenhagen would reduce the temperature more, but not by much, especially if developing nations were still exempt from emissions reductions.Is U.S. Sovereignty at Risk?Yes. Kyoto has no international enforcement mechanism with any real teeth. To actually reduce emissions, any successor treaty coming out of Copenhagen would need an effective enforcement mechanism. Domestic U.S. enforcement of the treaty, if ratified, would be problematic enough, but any binding international enforcement provisions would create additional serious problems.Compliance with such a treaty would require massive changes to the U.S. economy, and U.N. bodies would decide many of the details of those changes. For example, one way to comply with Kyoto or subsequent treaties is to purchase so-called offsets to carbon dioxide emissions. Offsets allow regulated entities to pay others to undertake projects that presumably reduce emissions globally, such as paying landowners to plant trees or bankrolling the installation of solar panels in poor countries. In many cases, companies find offsets cheaper than actually reducing their own emissions. However, these projects have been subject to fraud. For example, some offset projects have not actually reduced emissions, while others involved industrial facilities with unnecessarily high initial emissions for the purpose of profiting by lowering them later.[19] Currently, the Clean Development Mechanism under the U.N. decides which offset projects are acceptable. Thus, unelected international bureaucracies would control this critical aspect of a climate treaty, which would have significant implications for the U.S. economy.The largest sovereignty threat is that a subsequent treaty may create an international enforcement authority to determine whether signatories -- including the U.S. -- are in compliance with the treaty provisions and to deal with perceived violations. For example, a non-U.S.-controlled body could decide whether American companies must shut down coal-fired power plants.The Administration should avoid signing any such treaty because it would seriously infringe on U.S. national sovereignty.What Do China and Other Developing Nations Want from Copenhagen?Led by China, the developing world clearly prefers the Kyoto approach, particularly the exemption from emissions reductions.[20] Developing nations recognize the tradeoff between economic development and emissions reductions, and they have chosen economic development. These nations want any agreement in Copenhagen to continue Kyoto beyond 2012. While insisting on continued exemptions, the developing world is demanding that the developed nations undertake stringent new emissions reductions beyond Kyoto and provide massive aid to assist poor countries in voluntarily reducing emissions.What Will Likely Happen in Copenhagen?The Copenhagen conference has been billed as the next major global warming deal, with strong new emissions reduction targets that are binding and enforceable. Yet despite the buildup for more than a year, political and economic realities will likely influence its outcome for the better.The rift between the developed and developing world is still wide. For the most part, developed nations have recognized that the whole process is futile without meaningful involvement by major developing nations, but China, India, and others have refused to agree to such provisions. The prospect for massive aid packages from the developed world is also proving to be a nonstarter among the nations expected to pay the bill.There is also the growing realization that the Kyoto Protocol is a failure and therefore not a good model for Copenhagen. Finally, the obvious harm of imposing such costly measures in the midst of a global recession has also slowed momentum. Thus, Copenhagen presents an opportunity to change the direction of the post-Kyoto debate.What Should the Administration Do?The Obama Administration, although far more in favor of a global warming agreement than the Bush Administration, has acknowledged many of these realities, including the fact that domestic legislation is stalled in the Senate and unlikely to be enacted before the Copenhagen conference. U.S. negotiators at preliminary meetings have stated that they expect China and other major developing nations to undertake new obligations and that any agreement will not include massive wealth transfers to poor countries. Thus, the distance between the U.S. and developing world positions is still significant. The U.S. team has also admitted that the Kyoto approach has proven problematic, suggesting that climate change policy may need to focus more on domestic provisions enacted by each nation than Kyoto-style multilateral agreements.At a minimum, U.S. negotiators should comply with the provisions of the Byrd-Hagel resolution and refuse to sign any climate change treaty that fails to include meaningful participation by China, India, and other major developing nations or that threatens to harm the U.S. economy. They should also refuse to sign any treaty that would threaten U.S. sovereignty.This will likely mean no new treaty from Copenhagen, but negotiators should not agree to provisions that will harm the U.S. solely for the sake of signing a treaty.