Republican leaders essentially shut down the Senate Wednesday during what was supposed to be a time of debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, forcing clerks to read the entire 492-page bill aloud. Republicans said the maneuver -- which sucked up nine hours -- was a protest against the Democratic majority's slow pace in considering President Bush's judicial nominations.
By the time the reading wrapped up near 10 p.m. last night, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was livid. "[Climate change] is the most critical issue of our time," said Reid. "The American people have a right to have their Congress address this issue."
Reid read from what he described as a leaked strategy email [PDF] from a GOP lobbyist, which urged the party's senators to stall productive debate as long as possible in hopes of scoring "political points" against the Democrats.
"The goal is for a theme -- example, climate equals higher gas prices -- each day," Reid read from the memo, "and the focus is much more on making political points than in amending the bill, changing the baseline text for any future debate, or affecting policy."
"This Republican strategy memo couldn't be more clear: The Republican plan in dealing with the greatest challenge facing this world and this nation is more about making political points than legislating," said Reid. "You couldn't make up anything more cynical."
Reid had said he'd like to have debate over the Climate Security Act wrapped up by the end of next week, but Republican leaders last night pledged to keep dragging it out. "It is not a one-week bill," said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "This is at least a one-month bill."
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who earlier in the day had referred to Reid as "clueless," chimed in as well. "This is not an itty-bitty issue," he said.
So Reid said he would call for a cloture vote to end debate on the bill on Thursday or Friday, without substantive debate of amendments. It was a protest move, an effort to maintain authority over the bill and prevent further time-wasting on the part of the Republican leadership.
"The Republicans are trying to maintain the status quo in everything," said Reid, who appeared tired and frustrated as the scuffling dragged on past midnight. "They don't want legislation and they've proven that today time and time again."
In all likelihood, the cloture vote will mean death for the most serious climate bill ever taken up by the full Senate. The partisan high jinks of the last two days indicate that the vote will likely fall largely along party lines. And with no substantive debate of amendments, there's little chance the bill will get even close to the 60 votes needed to move forward.
Though the bill's sponsors and green groups had hoped to see more productive debate on the bill this year, events so far have at least provided a starting point for climate legislation next year -- and a clear villain to blame for its failure this year.
"If the Senate should fail to act on this bill, it is abundantly clear that the Republican leadership alone will be to blame," said Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope in a written statement last night. "While the Senate leadership has proposed real relief for consumers suffering from skyrocketing energy costs, unfortunately Senate Republicans have nothing to offer but reading and roadblocks."
Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success
‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science
Comments
View as Threaded
randino Posted 2:29 am
05 Jun 2008
Hopefully the coming election will alter the balance of power in the Senate. But we should beware of the old "enemy of my enemy is my friend" maxim. The record of the Republicans on global warming has been beyond shame and scandal. We should just recognize that our fight is not over if the Democrats sweep the elections. In reality it might prove to be a harder fight than with the Republicans. Your enemies will kick your ass. Your friends will break your heart.
Randy Cunningham
Cleveland, OH.
Randy Cunningham
Permalink
MAD MAC Posted 2:50 am
05 Jun 2008
The issue concerning how to deal with climate change is cost - pure and simple. Who's going to pay what. Because activists have this annoying little habit of lying when it suits their purposes, a lot of time has been lost waiting for the science to solidify. Meanwhile, the politicians are doing what politicians do, which is lie, obfuscate, and dither.
There is a lot of momentum on the issue, and as it gathers steam it will galvanize politicians across the spectrum into action. Why? Because it will be politically expedient to do so.
So the issue needs to be kept in the forefront. Realistic options need to continue to be explored, invested in (as in renewable energies, carbon sinks, etc.) and implemented. But if you try turning this into a "good guy, bad guy" scenario.......... counter-productive.
Victory in Pattani
Permalink
F James Handley Posted 4:41 am
05 Jun 2008
The bill is deeply flawed -- Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and a coalition of other progressive environmental groups point out that the bill would GIVE AWAY most of the carbon emissions permits. They advocate actioning ALL permits. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have also called for 100% auction of permits. So Lieberman-Warner is already way behind the political curve.
But who would get the permit auction money? The bill gives most of it to big energy corporations.
Rep Markey has introduced a bill in the House that would distribute auction revenue to individuals, and Sen Corker has offered a similar amendment in the Senate. Worthy improvements that aren't getting serious consideration (yet).
Lieberman-Warner is a trail balloon, but more than that, it's a trap to bring the howling dogs who deny the climate problem out of the woodwork so Democrats can campaign against them. As legislation, it's a failure. As political strategy, it's working like clockwork, and I can't help wondering why Republicans don't try to improve the bill (or at least fake it) intstead of obstructing it. There's plenty to improve on (like where the revenue would go) and they could avoid being tarred as neanderthal global warming deniers.
Too bad Boxer's political trick is working so well. But maybe it will lead to a realignment in the Senate.
Economists agree that the gold standard for effective climate policy is a revenue-neutral carbon tax with dividend. Maybe the spectacular crash of Lieberman-Warner will start a discussion about better alternatives.
For more about the advantages of a revenue-neutral carbon tax, see http://www.carbontax.org.
Permalink
Michael Wagner Posted 5:50 am
05 Jun 2008
"The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recently put out a report that says that nuclear power is too complex and too expensive and that the lead times are way too long for nuclear power to be capable of solving the greehouse effect," The truth about uranium mining and nuclear weapons," Socialist Worker Australia, 04/20/07.
How come we never hear about the permanent-magnet "MagLev" wind generators = 20% more output, plus its low-center of gravity = perfect for offshore wind farms = unlimited potential?
Turn electricity into Hydrogen for "rainy days."
Permalink
Kenny B Posted 7:08 am
05 Jun 2008
In any case, I would MUCH rather see a straight up tax on carbon, but that would be easy fodder for the planet-killing Republicans. They would say things like "They want to tax you for breathing," and use the old tax-happy liberal label. It's too easy to hate, so I don't see it happening.
The emissions trading scheme, however, amounts to practically the same thing, but because it's not called a "tax," it gets labeled as a "market mechanism" and more people think, "I like markets because they mean money."
That's why even though the bill is deeply flawed, it pains me to see Republicans treat it like a kid treats his medicine, using all manner of ridiculous tricks to hide from it. My only solace is the notion that there could be a better bill put forward in 2009.
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 10:52 am
05 Jun 2008
I think the whole thing is unravelling for the Democrats.
Stock market up.
Bakken Formation gives us gas for next 300 years.
New oil refinery makes us energy independent.
Global temperatues declining.
Gold down.
It all adds up; the Gore hoaxers have been defrocked.
Permalink
zenkate Posted 11:48 am
05 Jun 2008
The earth is our house. Let's clean it up!
Permalink
Tasermons Partner Posted 1:34 pm
05 Jun 2008
Again, I ask, what's your source for this?
New oil refinery makes us energy independent.
Idiot. Oil refineries refine oil, that's why we call 'em oil refineries. They turn oil into other things, like gasoline.
Refineries don't make a nation energy independent if they still get the oil for the refineries from other countries.
Global temperatues declining.
Not yet.
Gold down.
Let me guess...ya invested in Enron stocks, didn't ya?
We've been over this, jabailo, just cause prices go up or down for a week, that doesn't make it a long-term trend.
I suppose ya haven't seen that oil, copper, and steel prices are up, have ya? Along with most food stuffs?
Permalink