Maryland congressmen break along party lines on cap-and-trade
Maryland lawmakers voted along party lines as the House of Representatives narrowly approved a massive energy and climate-change measure this evening.
The vote was 219-212, with 44 Democrats opposing the legislation and 8 Republicans providing the support that Democrats and President Barack Obama needed to send the legislation on to the Senate, where its prospects are cloudy.
The legislation, which includes a cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, is the first of its kind ever to gain approval in either house of Congress.
Democrats opposing the measure included rural conservatives and liberal mavericks. The Republicans who backed the bill included moderate Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware and Mary Bono Mack of California. The votes of all House members can be seen here.
Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, the state's lone Republican, whose district takes in northern portions of the Baltimore metro area and extends to the state's western border, was the only Marylander to vote "No." The remaining congressmen, all Democrats, voted "Aye."
House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland, in supporting the legislation, prepared the following floor speech:
“This is a transformative moment. This is a moment to build a clean energy future for our country. This is a moment to create jobs. This is a moment to take on, at long last, a defining challenge of our time: global warming. I know that my colleagues can seize this moment; I know they can look back from a future in which America is independent of foreign oil and leading the fight against climate change and be able to say that, on this day, they were on the right side of this vote.
“This bill, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, is a true turning-point. It is a complex bill, but we can sum up its outcomes simply: new American jobs, less dependence on foreign energy, and a reduction in the carbon pollution that causes global warming.
“How does this bill accomplish those goals? Among its most important provisions are a requirement that utilities meet 20% of electric demand through renewable sources and energy efficiency by 2020; significant new investments in renewables, carbon capture and sequestration, electric vehicles, and cutting-edge energy research; and energy-saving standards for buildings, appliances, and industry. This bill also creates a Clean Energy Bank to fund promising energy projects across America; and it invests in high-tech transmission lines to build the essential foundation for a more efficient grid. New transmission lines, comprised of superconducting cable and other efficient wires, will carry more power within existing rights-of-way, with less land use. The result will be a more secure, environmentally-friendly grid. I worked with the Chairman and Rep. Inslee to ensure that those transmission provisions were included, because they are such an important part of a more cost-effective, energy-efficient future.
“Of course, the bill also includes the reduction of our carbon emissions by 17% by 2020 and more than 80% by 2050. We can fight global warming with the same kind of market-based, cap-and-trade solution that was so effective at combating acid rain at minimal cost in the 1990s. Global warming threatens every one of us; it will affect the kind of lives our children will lead and the kind of prosperity our country, and our world will enjoy.
“To those who complain about the cost of this bill, I answer that we are all paying the cost of carbon emissions already. The longer we wait to act, the more we will pay every year. But if we take action now, we can get jobs, growth, clean energy and energy independence for less than the price of a postage stamp a day, for each of us, according to the EPA. And with this bill passed and signed, the United States will finally be able to argue persuasively and credibly for global action on a challenge that knows no borders.
“At the same time, action on global warming will send a powerful, job-creating price signal to the private sector, spurring innovation in every part of the renewable energy economy. That is one of the reasons why the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a business coalition dedicated to fighting climate change, has argued that ‘the way we produce and use energy must fundamentally change, both nationally and globally’—and that this coming change represents an excellent opportunity for economic growth.
“And that is why another coalition of 19 businesses, including the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Duke Energy, National Grid, H.P., Starbucks, and Nike, wrote to President Obama that this bill ‘will drive investment into cost-saving, energy saving technologies…create the next wave of jobs in the new energy economy…[and] will provide the predictability we need to plan for future business success.’
“It’s long been understood that acting on global warming is a moral necessity—but now, more and more of us are realizing that it makes powerful economic sense, as well.
“Madam Speaker, a future of clean energy is well worth the price. My children, my grandchildren, and the generations to come will be either the beneficiaries of our stewardship, or the victims of our neglect. I urge my colleagues to pass this bill and put themselves on the side of progress and responsibility.”
Bartlett, who has crusaded for years on the energy issue, issued the following statement:
“I’ve never voted for a tax increase and that is the main reason why I could not support this bill. The Congressional Budget Office found this bill would force a massive redistribution of $1 trillion and increase federal government revenues by $24 billion. My constituents clearly understood that the cap and trade system in this bill is a gigantic hidden tax that they would end up paying. That’s why they were overwhelming opposed to it.
“I’m a scientist and I’ve studied this issue very carefully. I agree that emissions from burning fossil fuels pose a threat to our global environment by contributing to climate change. However, our dependence upon oil, especially imported oil poses a far graver and urgent threat to America’s economic prosperity and national security.
“It is a shame that the House majority chose to pursue a purely partisan process that produced a complex, convoluted, monstrosity of a bill. It grew by 600 pages in the past three days alone. It deserves to die from the weight of the games and back room deals. This bill is a monument to everything Americans hate about business as usual politics in Washington, DC.”
Actually, the CBO, whose analysis Bartlett cited, determined in a recent report that the House cap-and-trade legislation would cost the average American family about $165 a year.
The nation's wealthiest families would pay more. The nation's poorest families would actually benefit from the measure, by $40 a year, according to the recent CBO analysis.
Bartlett, of Frederick, is a leading spokesman for the "peak oil" movement, which maintains that most global petroleum supplies have already been tapped, or will be shortly. He is promoting a "green energy" event Monday in his district.
Comments
""peak oil" movement, which maintains that most global petroleum supplies have already been tapped"
Why the parentheses around "Peak Oil"? - is it an attempt to label it as a fringe movement? Somewhat nutty? A bit like the epithet "Greenie"? You are pathetic. The phrase "which maintains that most global petroleum supplies have already been tapped" is also flat wrong. What does it mean anyway? The language is sloppy.
Go and learn about it. Then you can comment.
Posted by: SailDog | June 26, 2009 10:51 PM
Congressman Kratovil, I'm in your District....actually you're in MINE.
And I'm going to do everything I can to wipe you out in 2010. And I've got lots of company. You've become a tool of oppressors, and now an oppressor yourself.
Posted by: James | June 26, 2009 11:03 PM
We will start with the 8 republican traitors that voted against our country and for this atrocity. Then we move on to the rinos and to the libs. Our beautiful country is very sick today and we need to begin to clean out the poison that has caused this horrible swing to the left.
Posted by: AJM | June 27, 2009 9:19 AM
The big eight of traitors are definitely voted to be out in November. You are traitors all in my understanding of the word. You represnte Obama and Co. and not the people of Mayrland. You stuck a dagger into the heart of the American people. No Thanks.
Posted by: Anthony Bellotte | June 27, 2009 10:36 AM
SailDog,
At present the "peak oil" movement IS a nutty fringe movement, predicting doom and gloom culminating every few years which usually passes right on by. "Peak oil" doomers have been around just about as long as oil has been around and they are best ignored.
Posted by: Drew | June 27, 2009 1:22 PM
The nation's poorest families will suffer the MOST from the bill. Many of them will lose their jobs. And the $40 a year "gift" from the government will not cover the increasing costs of food, gas, and other essencials.
Subjected to Obama's lies, manipulation, intimidation and bribes, the House passed Obama’s jobs killing, economy killing bill!
Corruption and coercion have reached levels previously seen only in Marxist dictatorships like those of Cuba or Venezuela.
Obama’s Cap and trade is another giant step towards Marxism — and the corruption, poverty, enslavement, destruction and despair that Marxism entails.
Obama is working much faster than Hugo Chavez at destroying the economy and imposing Marxism. No wonder the Russians are gloating:
From Pravda: “…the American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people…” http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0
We are NOT hapless sheeple! We must do whatever is necessary to defend ourselves and our children from the Marxist dictatorship that’s being set up in Washington.
Posted by: AntonioSosa | June 27, 2009 5:26 PM
Congressmen Kratovil and Rupersburger, you claim to be "centrists" and "independent voices" but time and again you vote like Pelosi and Mikulski. Does the word Represntative mean anything to you? Congressman Kratovil I hope you enjoy your two years because you don't fit your district and the voters won't be fooled twice.
Posted by: Al Mendelsohn | June 27, 2009 9:04 PM
Years Ago Obama Helped Fund the Carbon Program He Is Now Pushing Through Congress. While on the board of a Chicago-based charity, Barack Obama helped fund a carbon trading exchange that will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction program he is now trying to push through Congress as president.
The charity was the Joyce Foundation on whose board of directors Obama served and which gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were “instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, which now calls itself North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”
And that’s only the beginning of this tawdry tale. The “privately-owned” Chicago Climate Exchange is heavily influenced by Obama cohorts Al Gore and Maurice Strong.
For years now Strong and Gore have been cashing in on that lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.
Posted by: Lorren | June 28, 2009 12:36 PM
Republicans and Dems who voted FOR the "cap and trade" obamonation... WE ARE COMING FOR YOUR JOBS
Posted by: Randa Perry | June 29, 2009 7:40 AM
Watch this and you will see where we are going. Straight from the horses mouth.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4
From his mouth WITHOUT a teleprompter!
This bill is being touted as the Obama bill.
“The problem is can you get the American people to say this is really important and force their representatives to do the right thing, that requires mobilizing a citizenry…..
Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I’m capping greenhouse gasses, coal power plants, natural gas you name it whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retro-fit their operations, that will cost money and they will pass that money onto the consumers.”
Kerry, Boxer: U.S. ‘Needs’ Cap-and-Trade on Carbon Emissions Even if Energy Costs Rise
www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=45330
“It’s a win-win in so many different ways, we can’t afford not to do it,” Kerry said.“There could be some (price) increases,” Kerry admitted, adding that the “costs of doing nothing could be greater,” including a decline in the food supply. “But there’ll be higher rises if we don’t do it and start to curb these emissions because you’re going to pay more for the adaptations, the loss of food, all the other problems that come along with it.”
Boxer also acknowledged that energy prices will rise.
“In the short run, in the transition, there’s always an up-tick (in prices)”
WE ARE DOOMED!
Posted by: Fed Up | June 29, 2009 10:41 AM
It appears that liberals of all types are deliberately trying to destroy America's economy. How can we possibly replace 2% of our energy every year for 40 years, PLUS the 1%+ real growth in energy we need every year? Are they simply dumb as dirt? We only get 2.4% of our energy today from wind and solar. Solar costs $35,000 to equip a home.
Cap and tax is for fools. Defeat all liberals, Democrat and Republican.
Posted by: Tom | June 29, 2009 5:29 PM
Thank you Mr. Bartlett, the only representative who is truly on the side of THE PEOPLE!!
Posted by: BaltimoreBev | June 29, 2009 6:44 PM
… See, the thing is--there is no method of “greening” Coal-fired Power Plants...
So..., ...instead the Climate Bill channels BILLIONS of dollars to the fantasy that is called Clean Coal, such that King Coal makes out like a bandit, while the consumer pays and pays...
Here Read:
The illusion of clean coal / The Economist:
“The world is investing too much cash and hope in carbon capture and storage.”
+ The ‘Clean Coal’ Lobbying Blitz / The Center for Public Integrity::
“They’re the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, a collection of 48 mining, rail, manufacturing, and power-generating companies with an annual budget of more than $45 million — almost three times larger than the coal industry’s old lobbying and public relations groups combined.”
+ Clean Coal or Dirty Coal? / Alternative Energy Blog:
“… Peabody Energy, the world’s largest coal company spent over 5% of its revenues on political contributions, for comparison Exxon Mobil and General Motors spent a fraction of one percent. In seeming return for such generosity, The Energy Policy Act of 2005 included five billion dollars of subsidies for the coal industry.”
+ Climate Change Protection, or Climate Change Assurance? / Bloggers for Change:
“… the 1,200-page bill would also devote $60 billion to making sure clean coal isn't a loser.”
+Stimulus Money Puts Clean Coal Projects on a Faster Track / NY Times:
“The allocation of $3.4 billion in the federal stimulus bill for carbon capture and sequestration, as carbon storage is often called, however, has allowed Duke Energy and other companies to consider mounting full-scale projects.”
+ The Case Against Carbon Trading / Transnational Institute:
"... Citigroup’s Peter Atherton confessed that the European Union’s Emission Trading Scheme had 'done nothing to curb emissions.’ He admitted, ... Prices up, emissions up, profits up ...’ Who wins and loses? Coal and nuclear-based generators--biggest winners. Hedge funds and energy traders--even bigger winners. Losers ... Consumers!”
+ Why China Could Blame Its CO2 on West / WSJ, 11/12/07:
"If you have emission constraints, it's become very attractive to relocate dirty production to developing countries ... You import the finished goods, and leave the pollution in China.”
In fact, the Magnetic Levitation Wind Turbine simply uses PERMANENT MAGNETS to provide power equal to a small Nuclear Power Plant—at a tiny fraction of the price-tag…
The MagLev’s low-center-of-gravity = perfect for offshore = areas surrounding the US = 24/7!!!
And the MagLev's low friction = operates off of wind as slow as 3 mph!!!
Here Read:
+ Popular Science's 20th Annual Best of What's New Awards / Nanosolar Homepage:
--This honor goes to the remarkably designed PowerSheet flexible solar cells. Imagine a solar panel without the panel. Nanosolar has created an ink that takes sunlight and converts it into electricity. The ink is coated onto metal sheets as thin as aluminum foil with a printing-press-like device. The sheets are lighter, inexpensive and as efficient as traditional solar panels. The editors of PopSci believe that eventually every commercial rooftop could be carpeted with PowerSheet solar cells."
Wind/Solar could make very clean Hydrogen for "rainy days."
Of course, the distribution problem with Hydrogen Cars is not a problem with Hydrogen Power plants, nor with Hydrogen Jumbo Jets...
Posted by: MichaelLWagner | June 30, 2009 12:13 AM