Today in E&E Daily (sub. only), there's a chipper piece from Darren Samuelsohn about the prospects for action on climate change in the 110th Congress. Look, how exciting!
The 2006 election outcome may be less than a week old, but the pieces have started coming together for how the next Congress will tackle the global warming issue.
"Clearly, it's a sea change," said Emily Figdor of U.S. PIRG. "For the first time in a long time, Congress can finally get down to the business of what's happening."
Incoming Senate EPW Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said last week she would take a lead role for the Democrats. Speaking with reporters, Boxer said she plans to use California's new global warming law -- requiring a statewide cut of emissions of 25 percent by 2020 -- as a model in the drafting of federal climate legislation.
Wo0t! Right?
But a few paragraphs later:
Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), the chairman-to-be of the Energy & Commerce Committee, signaled last week that his climate change approach would be heavy on oversight hearings.
"Dingell is likely going to take his time about this. He's a very thorough member," said David Conover, a former Energy Department official and former Republican staff director to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Yeah, thorough. Sigh.
Then again, the tide could rise around Dingell:
Multiple members and committees are sure to be involved in the debate beyond Boxer, Dingell and Waxman. Former Hill aides suggest watching the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees, as well as the House and Senate Agriculture, Senate Energy and Natural Resources, Senate Commerce, House Resources and House Transportation and Infrastructure committees.
"When you talk in terms of global warming or climate, while there's a rush to say a hard carbon cap, or a cap and trade, there are many many parts of it," said Mark Menezes, former chief Republican counsel to the House Energy and Commerce Committee ...
"And you see this with some of the announcements about use of renewables, increased energy efficiencies, fuel choices, etc. All of that plays a part," he said. "There's no one thing. It's extraordinarily broad in its outreach. So what you can see is a lot of activity in these different committees on things they have jurisdiction over all toward the goal of coming together in a bill that could have the result of being a climate bill."
A final bit of amusement :
For his part, Bush has pledged to work with the new Democrat-controlled Congress.
In a prepared statement issued the day after the midterm elections, Kristen Hellmer -- a spokeswoman at the White House Council on Environmental Quality -- said climate change is among the issues the president is open to discussing with Democrats. But she also said there will be limits on how far Bush will go.
"He is opposed to any program which shifts jobs and emissions overseas," Hellmer said.
You'll pry our emissions from our cold, dead hands!
Literally.
Henry Waxman’s decade-long fight to improve the Clean Air Act
Caption needed! UPDATE: Caption found
Dingell joins Republicans in calling cap-and-trade an ‘energy tax’
Comments
View as Flat
David Roberts Posted 10:27 am
13 Nov 2006
On a teleconference with reporters, National Environmental Trust President Phil Clapp took specific aim at Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), the chairman-to-be of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who has announced plans to hold oversight hearings next year on climate change.
"That is precisely the policy the Republican Congress has pursued since 1995," Clapp said by phone from Nairobi, Kenya, where he is attending the United Nations-sponsored talks on the Kyoto Protocol.
Clapp added, "If another round of fact-finding hearings becomes the global warming policy of the Democrats, they will have walked away from everything they've talked about for the last five or six years."
Congress has held more than 230 hearings on global warming, more than enough groundwork to advance legislation on the issue, Clapp said. He also challenged Democrats to send a climate bill to President Bush before he leaves office in January 2009, forcing him to decide if he would veto it.Word.
www.grist.org
Permalink
Jason D Scorse Posted 11:39 am
13 Nov 2006
J.S.
J.S. teaches environmental economics and blogs at http://www.voicesofreason.info.
Permalink
Tod Brilliant Posted 1:38 pm
13 Nov 2006
Please, everyone, contact Nancy Pelosi's office and DEMAND that her party tackles the environmental issues that face us. Remember, nowhere in her "Six for '06" plan does she mention the environment (other than a vague statement concerning a reduction on dependence on foreign oil).
Nancy Pelosi can be reached at (202) 225-4965. Email = (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
//
var l=new Array();
var output = '';
l[0]='>';l[1]='a';l[2]='/';l[3]='';l[34]='\"';l[35]=' 118';l[36]=' 111';l[37]=' 103';l[38]=' 46';l[39]=' 101';l[40]=' 115';l[41]=' 117';l[42]=' 111';l[43]=' 104';l[44]=' 46';l[45]=' 108';l[46]=' 105';l[47]=' 97';l[48]=' 109';l[49]=' 64';l[50]=' 115';l[51]=' 101';l[52]=' 99';l[53]=' 105';l[54]=' 111';l[55]=' 118';l[56]=' 110';l[57]=' 97';l[58]=' 99';l[59]=' 105';l[60]=' 114';l[61]=' 101';l[62]=' 109';l[63]=' 97';l[64]=':';l[65]='o';l[66]='t';l[67]='l';l[68]='i';l[69]='a';l[70]='m';l[71]='\"';l[72]='=';l[73]='f';l[74]='e';l[75]='r';l[76]='h';l[77]='a ';l[78]='
Permalink
Jones Posted 10:31 pm
13 Nov 2006
The moment is right for the Democrats to capitalize on this sentiment (not very likely, unfortunately) and paint the Republicans' stance on Global Warming as backward and lacking in leadership and vision. They need to portray themselves as the ones taking action to protect the American public from this thorny security threat.
The Republicans' stance (and Dingell's aparently) is weak and prevaricating. Bush agrees warming is occuring, says maybe it's anthropogenic...don't know...needs more study... Or Menezes' long, rambling, confused, and completely substance-less quote above. This are exactly the type of thing that conservatives have gotten huge mileage from in the past, in mocking liberals for being ineffectual, intellectual pussies. It's a time-honoured tradition. But if the Dems act fast, there's an oportunity right now for them to turn that logic on its head. Don't soft-pedal the issue, come right out and say that yes, it's a difficult, serious problem, and we're the ones for this job. We cleaned up the President's mess in Iraq (!pending!) and now we're cleaning up the mess he's made of New Orleans.
Another way of putting this: Democrats need to be more like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Though somehow I have the feeling they're still cowed by 38 years of electoral failure and don't have the courage to lead the people to face up to an inconvenient truth.
Permalink
swozniak Posted 2:57 pm
14 Nov 2006
We REALLY need something like Pelosi's proposed plan, which itself is even long overdue.
Permalink