That letter from the investors is nice, but given the transition team appointments already made and the statements already made by Congress, there's little hope that either the Accord or the CPP survives. This is bordering on Pollyannaish echo-chamber talk. The same type of echo-chamber talk that lost the election. These media fools comparing it to Obamacare provisions don't know what they're talking about. He mentioned those provisions specifically on the campaign trail, so to act like it's a flip-flop is, at the very least, being dishonest with themselves.http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-climatechange-accord-idUSKBN1370JX?il=0
He has no intention of keeping us in. Elections have consequences, and this is one of them. The options being floated are pulling out of the UNFCCC or deleting the signature via executive order (since it was enacted by executive order instead of going through Congress). The executive order strategy enacted by Obama is about to backfire. Of course, Trump's got a friendly Congress with majorities in both chambers and a (soon-to-be) friendly Supreme Court, so he may go the permanent route and take the measure through the Senate, killing off any future chance of us re-joining in its current form. Any litigation brought to the Supreme Court in this scenario will lose, as the Court traditionally sides with US law over any international law.
The same applies to the CPP. With a Republican Congress and Supreme Court, he could easily pass a bill that permanently strips the EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gasses, shutting down any path via litigation.
This is what happens when you build a legacy on executive orders. You leave it hostage to fortune. The risk of ruin is bigger than often anticipated.
I'm open to being proved wrong, but I don't think I will be. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at the DNC. They're the ones who tilted the playing field to a losing candidate. They bet the farm, thinking it was going to be an easy "bag" and got caught with their pants down.