GAO: Climate change poses financial risk to government

A word of warning HERE:

The U.S. government is at high risk of financial exposure from climate change, the Government Accountability Office said on Thursday, two days after President Barack Obama vowed to tackle the issue with or without Congress’ help.

For the first time, the non-partisan congressional watchdog added fiscal exposure from climate change to its “High Risk List” of measures the federal government needs to fix.

“Climate change is a complex, crosscutting issue that poses risks to many environmental and economic systems — including agriculture, infrastructure, ecosystems, and human health — and presents a significant financial risk to the federal government,” the agency said.

There are now 30 programs and operations the GAO considers at high risk for waste, fraud, abuse and mismanagement, or that need broad-based transformation, from the management of federal oil and gas resources to enforcement of tax laws.

“GAO added this area because the federal government is not well positioned to address the fiscal exposure presented by climate change and needs a government-wide strategic approach with strong leadership to manage related risks,” the agency said in a statement.

The government owns extensive infrastructure, including military bases; insures property through the National Flood Insurance Program; and provides aid to victims of natural disasters, making it especially vulnerable to the impact of climate change, GAO said.



  1. We will not “fix” climate change. We will only be able to prepare for, and manage the impact of it.

  2. The Comedian

    We can fix everything and anything. We are the Democrat party. If a problem exists in the world, the universe, or in the nature of humanity, we can tax it, regulate it, and make endless laws to fix it. It’s really that simple. Expand the scope of government and spend more money. Problems. Solved.

    Didn’t you know this expdoc? It’s our mission statement.

  3. Luke Fredrickson

    And if we’re the Republic Party we can invade another country to solve any problem, even if the problem is completely fabricated. This is the one and only thing government can be trusted to do correctly, sending our kids off to die. Everything else government does is BS, except for telling women what to do with their bodies. Running up the debt is great until they elect a Democratic president. Rich people? They’re infallible. The rest? Takers.

  4. I missed the section of Paul Ryan’s budget plan where he called for invading another country.

    I’ll have to go back and re-read it.

    I also was unaware that only Republicans started wars in this country. Or at least I was unaware that those guys Roosevelt, Truman, Johnson, Kennedy and Clinton were all Democrats.

  5. The Comedian

    I love how Luke just assumes if someone doesn’t agree with the Democrat party they are 100% republican. Also the broad generalizations he makes that are based mostly on propaganda from the left wing machine. Poor Luke understands so little. And yes Luke, keep telling us how the Republicans want to tell women what to do with their bodies! It’s such a chilling thought! The war on women! The war on women! Polly wanna cracker, Luke?

  6. Whoops! Sorry, that should have read “all Republicans”. Thats what I get for trying to be a smart ***.

  7. The Comedian

    I knew what you meant. I was going to correct you and laugh at how stupid you are, but then I remembered I’m not Pat; I don’t need to use peoples’ mistakes to make myself feel like the big man on campus.

  8. “”Democrat Party” is a political epithet used in the United States for the Democratic Party.[1] The term has been used in negative or hostile fashion by conservative commentators and members of the Republican Party in party platforms, partisan speeches and press releases since 1940.[2]”
    “An epithet (from Greek: ἐπίθετον epitheton, neut. of ἐπίθετος epithetos, “attributed, added”[1]) or byname is a descriptive term (word or phrase) accompanying or occurring in place of a name and having entered common usage”
    “Some grammarians believe that the use of the noun “Democrat” as an adjective is ungrammatical.[40] However, the use of a noun as a modifier of another noun is not grammatically incorrect in modern English in the formation of a compound noun, e.g., “shoe store,” “school bus,” “peace movement,” “Senate election,” etc.[41] The use of nouns as adjectives is part of a broader linguistic trend, according to language expert Ruth Walker, who claims, “We’re losing our inflections—the special endings we use to distinguish between adjectives and nouns, for instance. There’s a tendency to modify a noun with another noun rather than an adjective. Some may speak of “the Ukraine election” rather than ‘the Ukrainian election’ or ‘the election in Ukraine,’ for instance. It’s ‘the Iraq war’ rather than ‘the Iraqi war,’ to give another example.”[42]”

    Shame on Wikipedia

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *