Climate Change Bill Stymied
After being filibustered by Republicans, a landmark global warming pollution control bill failed in the Senate today by a vote of 48-36. Sixty votes were needed to move the measure forward.
Among the senators voting for the Lieberman/Warner Climate Security Act, which would have created a national "cap and trade" system to fine industries for releasing excessive amounts of carbon dioxide, were Maryland's Senators Ben Cardin and Barbara Mikulski.
“The Senate leadership deserves a lot of credit for moving a global warming bill as far as they could this year,” said Environment Maryland State Director Brad Heavner. “We need to go from getting blocked from full consideration of the bill to passing the bill by next year.”
Some Republicans, who slowed the bill's consideration by insisting on reading aloud the text of the 500-page plus bill for many hours, regard the proposal as a giant tax that will cripple the U.S. economy.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) called it the "Climate Tax Bill." "This bill was doomed from the start," he said. "It was obvious that the Democrats were not serious about supporting this bill. This was one of the largest bills ever considered by this Congress and probably the largest non-appropriations bill the Senate has ever considered. This bill deserved a full and honest debate, with amendments offered and voted upon. The American people did not deserve a political exercise geared toward election year politics."
Sen. Cardin appeared at a press conference at the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and criticized the Republicans for using procedural tactics to delay and defeat the bill.
"This morning the U.S. Senate took a vote that effectively killed global warming legislation this year. The final outcome was not surprising, but it is still disappointing. It also is not the last word," Cardin said.
"Because of obstructionist tactics, Republican opponents of the bill kept us from considering even a single amendment over the course of an entire week of deliberation on the Senate floor. The Republican minority used extraordinary procedural steps to turn their back on fellow Republican and bill sponsor Senator John Warner (R-VA), and turn their back on the American public who urgently want the Congress to take steps now to reduce dangerous pollution and move our country closer to energy independence," Cardin said.
Six senators who were absent -- including Obama, Clinton and McCain -- issued statements saying they would have voted to continue consideration of the Lieberman/Warner bill.
McCain wrote: “Global climate change is the most important environmental challenge facing not only our nation, but the entire world. I am confident that given the will, the federal government can be a lead advocate for ensuring that America is doing its part to reduce global warming, and join in the global effort that is needed to address this world-wide environmental issue.
Like many of my colleagues, I believe this legislation needs to be debated, amended, improved, and ultimately, enacted. While my schedule precludes me from being in Washington, DC, tomorrow to cast my vote, if I were able, I would vote to invoke cloture on the substitute amendment. That does not mean I believe the pending bill is perfect, and in fact, it is far from it. For example, the provisions to impose Davis Bacon mandates should be removed. Most importantly, it must include provisions championed by Senator Graham and myself that would ensure that nuclear power, a proven and clean energy source, is included among the technologies supported in our efforts to address global warming. Nuclear energy is an emission free source of electricity for the nation, which is why it simply must be part of the comprehensive solution to addressing climate change, and if it is not, I could not support the legislation’s final passage.
Unfortunately, despite the commitment and tireless efforts of the bill sponsors, Senators Lieberman and Warner, it appears that for now, the Senate, at the direction of the Majority Leader, will choose to put politics above policy, and Congress will fail to act yet again on this critical issue. But rest assured, we will not give up until we finally succeed in enacting needed, comprehensive cap and trade legislation to address this urgent problem.”
Senator Obama wrote: "I have a unanimous consent request that I may have printed in the Record a statement of Senator Barack Obama which says if he were able to be present, he would vote to invoke cloture. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: Madam President, I will not be present for tomorrow's cloture vote on the substitute amendment to the climate change bill (S. 3036). However, were I able to be present, I would vote to invoke cloture. Thank you."
I report on the environment and Chesapeake Bay. A native of West Virginia, I have focused mainly on Maryland's environment since moving here in 1983. Along the way, I've crewed aboard a skipjack in the bay, canoed under city streets up the Jones Fall from the Inner Harbor, and gone deep underground in a western Maryland coal mine. Recently, I have been covering the growth and development transforming the landscape. I love seafood, rambles in the country and good stories. I hope to share some here.
Comments
The Dow tanking and oil skyrocketing are 'symptoms' of a failed energy policy. We need to:
a) Build PHEVs (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles) to revitalize Detroit's obsolete car technology.
b) Build advanced technology nuclear power plants, to power (a) and the economy, and to eliminate oil imports.
c) To keep the environmentalists happy, and to solve climate change if it needs 'solving', plant solar planters and wind farms around the 'nukes'.
d) After doing the above, we go fishing.
Regards, Art Collins, Retired Aerospace & 'Nuke' Engineer
Posted by: Art Collins | June 6, 2008 7:23 PM
Check out this US Energy Footprint Chart, an interactive United States Energy Consumption Footprint chart, illustrating Greenest States and more. This site has all sorts of stats on individual State energy consumptions, demographics and State energy offices.
http://www.eredux.com/states/
Posted by: Fred | June 6, 2008 11:19 PM
There are three essential reasons why the Lieberman-Warner bill badly needed to be defeated.
1. There is Global Climate Change, but it is cooling, not warming, and man's emissions of CO2 have nothing to do with it. It does not take a scientist to figure this out. This fiction is promoted by politicians who are not necessarily scientists. There has been over 40 billion dollars spent on trying to convince the world that this is a crisis, yet in the last hundred years (a period of high growth in CO2 emissions), we are at almost exactly the same point in our climate as we were in 1908. But, the most telling fact is that those scientists who count sunspots and extrapolate well known climate cycles can predict the future climate, but those who think man's CO2 emissions control the climate have models which contradict each other and don't ever get any predictions right. So, how can these so-called scientists expect us to believe CO2 is the cause when it is obviously the sun which is the strongest influence, and the CO2 models produce nonsensical predictions.
2. The Lieberman-Warner Bill is identical to the Kyoto Protocols used worldwide, except the reductions in CO2 are much more severe. Now, not a single country who adopted this scheme met its targets for that reason. Two did meet the targets, but for unrelated reasons. The intractable problem is that the cap and trade scheme does not work if everyone's carbon budget is exceeded. And, of course it will be -- that is the objective is it not? So, the administrators of Kyoto provide another source of carbon credits in the form of planting CO2-absorbing trees in the 3rd world. There are three problems with this, it does not permanently remove the CO2, it requires clearing land which has trees on it already, so they count the new trees and ignore the CO2 produced by burning the old trees, and, most serious there is no audit mechanism, and it is well known that many of these carbon credit operations just kick-back part of the money to the politicians and then just put the rest in their pockets. It is very lucrative since it is all pure profit. This is the global warming money machine.
3. The supply of petroleum feed-stocks is claimed to be rapidly dwindling, and it is, not because there is, as of yet, an exhaustion in reserves, but because the neo-Luddite Environmentalists successfully stopped all American exploration, construction of drilling sites, refineries, nuclear plants, hydro power, and even renewable power because of interference with birds, noise, ugliness, and for other reasons.
Yet, the world's third largest reserves were just discovered off the coast of Brazil, and we know the arctic wildlife reserve has substantial reserves. and we can liquefy coal, oil-sands, shale and even peat. North America is rich in these supplies which could provide 300 years of energy.
Well, the lack of supply causes escalation of prices, and, if Lieberman-Warner passed, the prohibitions against CO2 release would permanently put all these supply sources off limits. The prices would continue to rise and even in North America, there would be food supply problems, and starvation and death in the third world.
Lieberman-Warner is an economic death sentence, the largest tax increase in history, the abandonment of capitalism for a Soviet-style government run system, a dictatorship of the neo-Luddites. For what good reason should we do this -- I ask you?
There is no warming, the proposed solution does not work, it enriches the politicians and costs trillions of dollars, and it shuts the door to our own future, and will cause death and starvation.
And, the Democrats are hell-bent to do this?
Posted by: Arthur E. Lemay | June 7, 2008 12:17 PM
One third of the people voting against this bill are Democrats.
Should we do something about pollution? Of course.
This bill and cap and trade is NOT the way to achieve a cleaner country or planet.
Any benefit from such a system will come at a heavy cost to middle and working class people.
Posted by: NOTA08 | June 7, 2008 3:41 PM