This document examines the Kyoto Protocol and the position of the United States on its participation in the Kyoto Protocol. To understand the basis of the Kyoto Protocol we must agree that our planet is warming and we (its citizens) are contributing to its warming. Any general argument about global warming must address at least the following five questions:1. Is global warming really happening?2. If global warming is occurring, are humans responsible for it? If global warming occurs, what will be the consequences for life on earth?4. If human action contributes to global warming and the consequences are likely to be negative, what can be done and what are the social, political and economic consequences of alternative courses of action?5. If it is decided that some form of collective action is necessary to counter global warming and that action involves sacrifices, how should these sacrifices be distributed among the various countries of the world? (Wesley & Peterson, 1999, p. 167)“The topics are the subject of intense scientific and political debate. Highly qualified scientists have argued that observed climate patterns are within the bounds of normal statistical variation” (Wesley & Peterson, 1999, p. 168). Many believe that efforts to prevent global warming require potentially painful actions to avoid uncertain and distant negative consequences (Wesley & Peterson, 1999Kyoto Protocol DefinedThe Kyoto Protocol is a treaty considered the first real step toward resolving global warming Gardiner ( 2004) explains that the Kyoto Protocol is best understood in light of its history, which began with the Earth Summit in 1992. The Earth Summit was a meeting... half of the document... otocol Initially, the attitude of US companies towards climate change mitigation was conflicting reduction of greenhouse gases (Falke, 2011). This group was led by ExxonMobil and other industry giants; this coalition is currently muted in Congress and in 1997 the US Senate passed the Byrd-Hagel Resolution which stated that the Senate should not ratify any international climate agreement that would impose large economic costs on the United States (Falke, 2011). “Concerted opposition from business and Congress ultimately led President Clinton not to submit the Kyoto Protocol for Senate ratification” (Falke, 2011, p.. 26).