Blitz!

White House and enviros amp up efforts to pass climate bill in House 3

The House is gearing up to vote on the American Clean Energy and Security Act as soon as next week, and both the White House and environmental groups are planning a full-court press to get it passed.

Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), coauthor of the bill, has said he is “very close” to making a final deal with Democrats like Collin Peterson (Minn.), chair of the House Agriculture Committee, who has threatened to torpedo the bill if he doesn’t get exactly what he wants for the ag sector. A new, negotiated version of the bill is expected to be released next week.

The Obama administration is planning to make next week “energy week” to rally support for the bill. Reports Politico, “The White House plans to dispatch Cabinet officials to push the administration’s energy agenda and urge Congress to pass climate legislation currently under siege from skeptical Democrats in the House.”

The admin started its push this week, with the release of a new government report on climate science that warns of dire effects across the country. The report’s authors have been holding briefings on the report on Capitol Hill this week to light a proverbial fire under legislators and their staffs.

The big question is how vocal President Obama himself will be; he was notably absent from launch events for the new climate report this week. We don’t yet have a schedule of events for “energy week,” but First Lady Michelle Obama is slated to kick off the 2009 National Conference on Volunteering and Service in San Francisco on Monday, and word around town is her remarks will have a green bent.

Meanwhile, greens and other progressive groups are going at full tilt.  On Wednesday, a coalition of environmental, labor, Hispanic, and veterans groups announced that they’re spending about $5 million on an “ad blitz” aimed at getting the climate bill passed.  They’re running print ads [PDF] in the major Capitol Hill publications, plus online ads targeted at decision makers.

Two members of the coalition, the Sierra Club and Vote Vets Action Fund, are running this ad on cable and broadcast TV in the D.C. market through June 25:

Other groups are running ads targeting specific legislators and demographics.

This ad from Environmental Defense Action Fund, in which a Christian minister discusses the need to address climate change, is running in the districts of nine swing representatives from both parties:  Allen Boyd (D-Fla.), Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.), Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.), Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (D-S.D.), Baron Hill (D-Ind.), Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio), Erik Paulsen (R-Minn), Lamar Smith (R-Texas), and John Tanner (D-Tenn.).

Another Environmental Defense ad, this one featuring Exelon CEO John Rowe, is running nationally, with extra time slots in the districts of Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Jim Gerlach (R-Pa.):

Environmental Defense has also teamed up with Republicans for Environmental Protection on ads that target specific GOP House members, calling on them to be “true, common-sense Republicans” and support the bill. Here’s one running in the district of Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.):

Similar ads are aimed at Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.), Michael Castle (R-Del.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Leonard Lance (R-N.J.), Christopher Lee (R-N.Y.), Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.), Dave Reichert (R-Wash.), and Chris Smith (R-N.J.).

Kate Sheppard covers energy and environmental politics for Mother Jones. She was previously the political reporter for Grist and a writing fellow at The American Prospect. You can find her work here and follow her on Twitter.

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. setb Posted 8:02 am
    19 Jun 2009

    Can it really be considered an all out blitz when it includes the major caveat of strengthen? What if Congress don't strengthen it--then what? 
  2. Global Changes Posted 8:56 am
    19 Jun 2009

    If they dont it will be their undoing. The foundations of American lifestyle has to radically change if we are going to get out of seveare climate change. The land has been consumed a much has and still is wasted or wasteful.
  3. Edwin Y. Posted 3:34 am
    22 Jun 2009

    Unfortunately, that is a messy one. It is easy to suggest(and very
    likely desireable) that bills not include bundling to sneak things
    through. However, since it is strategically desirable to do so in many
    cases, you would actually have to prohibit the practice to keep it from
    happening. Trying to draft a workable definition of "about something,
    and only about something" that excludes abuses without excluding
    legitimate conduct, and doesn't rely on "good faith"(a commodity known
    to be in short supply near most legislative chambers) is virtually
    impossible.In a case like this, it would be trivial to argue that, since
    technology is almost certainly a component of any viable response to
    climate change plus all of the fossil fuels, and all of those machine
    which uses oil even in the hike of oil prices, and since IP is arguably
    connected with technological
    development, IP protection is arguably related. If you are subtle
    enough, you could easily slip in broad enough wording that your climate
    change bill has ramifications for all kinds of IP, while ostensibly
    remaining "on topic".It might be possible, and would certainly be desirable, to curb the
    worst abuses; but there is essentially no way to attack the (large)
    grey area.

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement