The reality is that the problem is called Global Warming, not America Warming. China long ago passed America as the leading emitter of greenhouse gases. Developed world emissions have leveled off while developing world emissions continue to grow rapidly, and developing nations have no interest in accepting economic constraints to change that dynamic. In this context, the primary effect of unilateral action by the U.S. to impose costs on its own emissions will be to shift industrial activity overseas to nations whose industrial processes are more emissions-intensive and less environmentally friendly. That result may make environmentalists feel better, but it will not better the environment.

Does Romney have a point here? We do need a global solution, but really we need a bilateral US-China solution, although a multilateral US-EU-China-India treaty would probably be better. Right now, I think the US and China are playing a game of chicken (or prisoners' dilemma, really) with the environment. I know we don't like to grant conservatives any points on global warming, but I think Mitt may have a point above.