Just months ago there was a palpable sense of optimism that no matter who is elected president this November that the U.S. would soon embark on serious climate change legislation. I think recent events have shown that the chances of that happening are slim to none.
Let's start with if McCain is elected.
Today the senator from Arizona is going to do a photo-op on an oil rig because he has become the biggest champion of increased drilling this side of the Middle East. He wants to extend major tax breaks for oil companies and open up virtually all of America to more drilling.
I was always highly skeptical of McCain's commitment to serious climate change legislation and the way he has talked about cap-and-trade on the campaign trail has only increased that skepticism. He has said repeatedly that he is against capping greenhouse gas emissions even though that's exactly what a cap-and-trade system does. In addition, he is in favor of freely allocating permits to energy companies, which is a trillion-dollar give away to big business.
If McCain wins he is going to be so in debt to the right wing that I would not be surprised to see an extremely reactionary energy policy full of more big tax breaks for fossil fuels and increases in nuclear power, with minimal incentives for alternative fuels. Even if addressing greenhouse gas emissions ultimately makes economic sense, in the short term any serious policy acts like a tax on emissions (even with cap-and-trade) and I see no way McCain raises energy prices given the GOP's ideological aversion to taxes and the state of the economy. Lastly, McCain simply doesn't care much about domestic issues; he is a foreign policy person and little more. Don't expect him to spend the political capital necessary to enact any serious climate legislation even if he might have wanted to at some point. (While he would be facing relatively large Democratic majorities in Congress, I wouldn't be surprised to see him exercise his veto power rather liberally, although it is possible that the Democrats could build veto-proof majorities for better energy policy.)
With respect to Obama I am a little more optimistic, but not by much.
Obama's plan calls for the auctioning of permits and so far he has done a pretty good job of resisting the ridiculous drilling mania that has gripped the GOP base. Obama, however, will enter office with major crises to address along with major objectives that will be extremely difficult to enact. My guess is that he will use his political capital more on foreign policy than most expect, and that health care will be his domestic priority. I think he may make some significant progress on funding of alternative energy, but I would be surprised if a seriously binding cap on greenhouse gas emissions was accomplished in the first year or two, if at all during his first term.
Progressives are fighting an uphill battle that will only get steeper. The public's tremendous ignorance on the determinants of gas prices and their widespread support for increased drilling is a serious obstacle that requires skilled leadership to circumvent. And for all the talk about the new environmental consensus within religious communities, pastor Rick Warren didn't ask McCain or Obama one single question about the environment in more than two hours of questions last weekend.
Unfortunately, with the economy in the tank and numerous foreign crises brewing or still to be resolved, the environment ranks even lower in public consciousness. What to do about it? I'm not sure.
To be continued ...
What are the chances of a cap-and-trade system being established in the U.S. this year?
Palin bashes ‘cap and tax’ and commends Obama on nuclear
Comments
View as Flat
Jon Rynn Posted 10:29 am
19 Aug 2008
Permalink
GreyFlcn Posted 11:05 am
19 Aug 2008
Ever notice that tag line in McCain's campaign ads?
If you assume what they are talking about is putting a Price on Carbon emissions, then clearly McCain is trying to have it both ways.
-David Ahlport
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 11:44 am
19 Aug 2008
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 12:15 am
20 Aug 2008
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 1:43 am
20 Aug 2008
Permalink
Zephaniah Posted 1:50 am
20 Aug 2008
McCain's chief foreign policy advisor Randy Scheunemann received, with a partner, $2,000,000 over the past 3 years to lobby for the country of Georgia and several others.
McCain's staff has been full of corporate lobbyists, including one who lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co., which beat US owned Boeing for a contract worth $35 BILLION to build aerial tankers for the AIR FORCE.
Charlie Black, who was McCain's campaign chairman, ran a lobbying firm that represented brutal dictators like Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire, terrorist rebel Jonas Savimbi in Angola, Iraqi fraudster Ahmed Chalabi and of course our favorite war profiteering corporation, Blackwater.
If McCain hires these people when he is running for president, who will he appoint to cabinet positions???
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 3:20 am
20 Aug 2008
if we all just say "I do believe, I do believe"
then we will be saved
I like the borrow irresponsibly idea better because it shows some cynicism, but, given the state of the dollar, Fannie, Freddie and world finance markets -- plus the cynical and suddenly fiscally responsible Repubs (just wait for it) -- I doubt that the borrow irresponsibly option will be there
but I would go for it if I could
we need votes; we must build coalitions; that means back-scratching. play or go home. not because it is right, but because those are the only two options
on a more positive note (hey, plenty of room to go upbeat) I think Roberts had a good insight the other day
people do not believe solar, efficiency, etc. is possible
we need a demonstration
something to build confidence that there is an alternative to drilling
maybe the grid issue is a good place to start
for all the months that I have been waiting here, I haven't heard any practical, comprehensive approach that could get the needed votes
plenty of businesses and unions that could make money on this, it seems. why not figure out how they can make money, and rally them to a plan that could build confidence in a more progressive future
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 4:50 am
20 Aug 2008
Also about a pure grid: the problem with grid improvements unaccompanied by increased renewables is that it would work fine for coal, making it even easier than now to build plants near those with the least political clout. So for it not be just a cave with no environmental benefits grid improvements have to be accompanied by massive renewables - which also provide union jobs.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 5:39 am
20 Aug 2008
So it is not a lack of any practical ideas that would work, as ce1907 complains, that's keeping this from happening. It is instead the hindrance by those who support the utility industry and fossil fuel industry, who at every turn do everything they can to block these ideas and programs. And for all you leftists, that includes the overpaid workers for the big utilities, who have worked to block public power.
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 5:54 am
20 Aug 2008
Second, big picture, we have to find a way forward that seems feasible, and, eventually, normal.
Wolverine has a point about the money interests, but public ignorance and suspicions are a more substantial problem (exploited by Repubs, Oil, Coal, etc.). Frankly, one of the suspicions is directed at dirty rotten hippies who want to cut the military and raise taxes.
But, as usual, the uninformed are of two minds (or three or four) on most subjects, and so persuasion is possible -- if you can do it without stubbing your toe on various identity issues.
So, to sum up, how to make solar energy and electric cars seem normal. Soon.
Third, "pure grid." Already I am lost. And I know a hell of a lot more than the general public.
This is one thing that drives me crazy about this site.
The big problem in Congress is that it is staffed by lightweights whose principal concerns are petty back-stabbing, cautious conventional wisdom, and personal attacks on everyone outside the clique. So it is a breathe of fresh air to come to this site where noone knows or gives a rats ass about any of the things that consume Hill staff. Halleluya, here are serious people!
but then
but then
no one has a bill! No one deigns to get into the mud, figure out specific language, find sponsors, drum up co-sponsors, change the bill in smelly ways to get a few more co-sponsors, blitz offices to get bills through committee, then again on the floor, etc.
Allegedly, there are enviro groups, and they could do this. But they don't. They hold parades for the birds and bunnies (good for fund raising) and do multi-hour conf calls blasting each other or congratulating each other
but they don't do geeky energy policy stuff, and then organize support
so I nominate you for the job. or you and Rynn. or you, Rynn, and Romm
or someone
isn't anyone willing to do the work to save the planet?
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 7:16 am
20 Aug 2008
For a long time a friend of mine, the late Professor Seymour Melman, knew a Congressman, the late Ted Weiss (Jerry Nadler now has his seat), and Weiss would introduce a bill on "economic conversion" every session, that is, a very well-thought out bill about how to convert military factories into civilian ones. The bill had a number of cosponsers, and then, eventually, Jim Wright became speaker of the house, and decided to make it his number one priority -- and guess what, Gingrich goes after him about some idiotic book sales, and he's out -- now whether or not he was targeted because he decided to make economic conversion a number one priority, I don't know, but the point is, would it be useful to have somebody introduce legislation that you would think is totally unpassable at this point, but it could be used as a rallying cry, and at least it would be there if the political winds shifted?
The problem is this: is anyone going to hire me or Gar or whoever (or you) to run around Capitol Hill putting together coalitions of Congresspeople, even business, grassroots groups, etc? Barring that, or maybe not even barring that, wouldn't it be nice to at least have some really good bills sitting there, unpassable for now, but something that could at least motivate people? And please don't tell me it's not practical because we have to do it now, nothing that will solve the problem can be done now, so you wind up making the practical the enemy of the long-term possible...or something like that.
So anyway, ce1907, please dispense your wisdom.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 7:39 am
20 Aug 2008
Permalink
Gar Lipow Posted 8:35 am
20 Aug 2008
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 10:19 am
20 Aug 2008
(there WILL be other kinds)
and I bet Sen. Sanders will introduce it, and make amendments based upon it when some grid bill is pushed, at the mark-up in the Energy Committee.
Then your provisions have a forum, and maybe enviro groups will rally to your issues.
A practical approach.
But first, someone must draft Gar's bill.
ps. Mr. Rynn, find something good that people can make money on. You'll find friends.
Permalink
Jason D Scorse Posted 10:53 am
20 Aug 2008
We need to focus on the root causes of problems. http://www.voicesofreason.info.
Permalink
mwildfire Posted 7:00 am
21 Aug 2008
And then there is another big problem for the prospects of climate change legislation: the fact that this year has been a cool one, at least in the US. The only way significant numbers of people will put pressure on lawmakers to take even inadequate action is if they are personally and continuously impacted by the problem. Mother Nature screwed up big time with this one.
As for "finding a way that people can make money on" cleaner energy or conservation, there ARE plenty of ways for them to do that, and there are campaigns like the Apollo Project pushing for green jobs--but unfortunately you can't get anywhere near the political pressure out of PROSPECTIVE money streams that you can get from a threat to an existing one--people who are attached to an existing money spigot will fight to protect it, while people who think they might make a connection to a potential future one will get around to doing it later when they're not busy.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 8:36 am
21 Aug 2008
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 11:06 am
21 Aug 2008
do it
show us
we'll carry the weight after that
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 12:37 pm
21 Aug 2008
http://www.ea2020.org/
Those guys not only sat around pulling their puds like we do on this site, they put together an actual legislative package, and have even found Congressional sponsors for a few pieces of it.
Problem is, the environmental movement, such as it is, is diffuse and uncoordinated and without much political muscle. The bills exist. What's missing is the social movement to drive legislators forward. If you have a clue how to get that going, let me know. I don't. And so I wonk.
grist.org
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 1:13 pm
21 Aug 2008
ce1907 and mwildfire, I appreciate your legislative wisdom, keep it comin'.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:24 pm
21 Aug 2008
Take it from the subsidies going to the status quo energy economy. big oil, coal, nuclear, agribizz.
How to price carbon?
Gore's carbon tax, that provides an equal, offsetting tax cut to working families. That way it is revenue neutral, not a tax hike, and trading scam free.
How to choose which techologies to subsidize?
Subsidize per GHG free kwh generated or saved. Have NREL specify the savings of different techologies and power companies measure the kwhs.
How to spur mass production and investment?
Purchase millions of plugin hybrids, ground source heating/cooling systems, and solar cogeneration systems for government use. Jawbone corporations to make matchinmg orders.
How to measure progress and revive the economy?
Set targets for oil and other fossil fuel and electricity demand reduction. Get everyone in on it, like FDR did in WW 2. Use rationing as a tool to keep the reduction on track and respond to any emergency shortages in supply. Like from a war or natural disaster related oil shortage.
KISS...keep it simple stupid, and it's the economy stupid. Guiding principles to keep on the path.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:43 pm
21 Aug 2008
How do you get them to do that? Speak up and ask them collectively? Herding cats (democrats) is easy compared to herding environmentalists.
How about getting a few thousand dedicated representatives of the movement, like the staff writers and guest contributors here and on other venues to ask them?
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:22 pm
21 Aug 2008
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1194019/
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 9:59 pm
21 Aug 2008
I do not think you understand the task
the existence of SOME plan does not make the nut
what I encouraged Gar and Jon to do is to parse out what are the bare minimums for effective action in some area -- like grid -- and to try to package it in a way that could collect majority support
not everything wanted, but the key stuff
highlight the key stuff for the Grist crowd
try to get Sen. Sanders to introduce something with the key stuff
hopefully get an enviro group to bird dog the key stuff, get co-sponsors, put pressure on at hearings
leg work
there is no end of rambling bs, good with the bad, all over the place. cacophony
Energize America is good example of what will never work. Acid attacks on the impure. Guess waht, we need a LOT of votes from the impure
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 1:42 am
22 Aug 2008
It would be nice to have a proposal for direct building of wind/solar, but then that gets more into the "market" and people don't like that. At the very least it seems to me you could do it for government operations though, local/state/national, no?
I'd even try for government funding of residential/commercial building near transit stops, something along the lines of how governments encouraged suburbanization, more of a guarenteeing role than a direct financing role.
And I'd even go for some attempts to create organic farms near cities, maybe a financing/tech advice role. What thinkest thou?
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 11:04 am
22 Aug 2008
You are an incurable egghead. Your question supposes that the key to progress is unraveling the metaphysics of the political moment. Too complicated.
The real keys are diligence, common sense and elbow grease.
It is frustrating that so few people here (or anywhere) seem to understand the power of the grass roots to affect Congress, or how it could be done.
Starting with basics. The money interests are most powerful when their lobbyists are whispering in the dark; progressive activists (and conservative activists) are most powerful when choices are openly and loudly discussed.
Figuring out how to apply some light in the way that will do the most good requires some understanding of the process.
Many folks imagine all Congressmen bought and sold by contributors. Not directly. The bigger reality is mass confusion. Congressmen are way over programmed. No way can anyone be informed about all the things that they have to pretend to be informed about. So they look for cues.
On big issues (like war), public opinion is directly relevant. But on geeky policy, like energy bills, Congressmen look to the leadership, which, as a practical matter, means the committees.
Most choices about what to be FOR are made in committee. Later, you can vote against what the committee proposes, but very difficult to add new things. Technically possible, but a mess. Not the best place to try to target your influence.
If you want to affect legislation, you need to try to affect what comes out of committee. Timing is crucial.
You need to have proposals early, and be criticizing the specifics of other proposals early. Many choices get baked into the drafting. Small phrases can make a big difference.
How to do it? First, you have to establish that you are a player. Best way to do that is to show you are paying attention.
As a practical matter, to be a player you need three things: a phone, a computer, and a popular website. It is very low tech.
You have to make telephone calls, and keep lists. Very tedious. Vitally important.
No one is doing it.
Few want to. No glamour. Not what attracts people to politics. Someone like Wolverine would do it, but few others. And those few don't live in DC.
Here is how it can work.
You get a good proposal. That is what Gar and you are supposed to do. Look at other, earlier proposals. Talk to folks. Figure out what is important. Draft something. Circulate it. Get allies in enviro community. Get someone like Sanders to introduce your bill.
Now you have something pending in committee.
Next comes the hard work no one does. Call Congresmen on committee. Ask their position. Make lists. Tabulate positions. (Adjust bill if seems reasonable and helpful.) Then go on your popular website and summarize the situation.
what are key issues?
who is where on what?
what alternatives seem to be the rival approaches?
Then you can rabble-rouse, get emails to flood Congress, etc.
But the main thing is to persistently pay attention. Keep calling, keep updating the list, make it clear that you won't go away.
A fairly small group of dedicated individuals could use the internet to be a powerful force for good.
Instead, we don't use the internet effectively. Generally, we remain spectators. wait till the deals go down, then bitch and moan
Don't wait. be proactive. Get ahead.
Grid seems like a good demonstration project because I think others will push it. Something will happen. Start now, keep at it, and we could shape it somewhat.
Why don't enviro groups do it? Rather preen. Internal politics. Slaves to birds and bunnies; energy tech stuff too dull. A hundred reasons probably.
Maybe some enviro is right on it already. Great. Promote her. But I don't know about her, and that indicates a problem.
Permalink
David Roberts Posted 5:41 pm
22 Aug 2008
grist.org
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 12:25 am
23 Aug 2008
Grist cannot possibly cover all issues, but could pick maybe 3 topics a year to give extensive coverage for a year.
For each topic, Grist should track some Grist beauty pagent contestant bill (like the Gar/Jon grid bill) and its competitors through committee.
Presumably, Grist contributors will find one or more enviro groups to team up to help push the bill, and together a sponsor and some co-sponsors will be found.
Some Grist intern can ask for lists, and publish the lists and update the lists in the special section.
what competing issues bills? (link to text)
what co-sponsors
results of phone calls to offices of Congressman on the committee about bills
results of phone calls to offices of Congressen on the committee about "key issues" relevant to bills
grids for "key issues" and comparing provisions on competing bills
schedule of planned email lobbying campaigns by various groups on various issues or bills
keep track of the nuts and bolts (and provide a nudge for someone to be doing the nuts and bolts, or get embarrassed)
Then, occasionally, articles on the main page summarizing developments as interesting things occur
it would be a useful and interesting activity
it would be a model for how enviros could make public what they are doing
(they do some)
3. it might breed some expectation by blog readers that someone should be telling them what is happening in Congress AT THE TIME THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING MOST MATTERS
routines matter; culture is based upon them; we need to change the Congress watching expectations of a generation
There will no doubt be problems encountered. The biggest, I expect, will be that some big enviro orgs will not want to "endanger relationships" by bringing close scrutiny.
That is why we need "hit and run activism" coverage by Grist. Bring light to what the guys are doing who are supposed to be bringing the light.
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 3:24 am
23 Aug 2008
As a practical matter, to be a player you need three things: a phone, a computer, and a popular website. It is very low tech.
You have to make telephone calls, and keep lists. Very tedious. Vitally important.
No one is doing it.
Few want to. No glamour. Not what attracts people to politics. Someone like Wolverine would do it, but few others. And those few don't live in DC.
Actually, I have done it for elections. Rather boring and hard work. The problem is, except for volunteers to work the phones and walk precincts, and who are at least somewhat unreliable, you have to pay someone to do what you're describing. Who's going to pay for this?
This is a perfect example of why the U.S. political system is a plutocracy, not a democracy. The rich can hire people to do this work, the rest of us cannot. I once ran an election campaign for Sierra Club (opposing a bad ballot measure) and even though I was paid, it was very low pay and long hours. The reason I was willing to work long hours for low pay was that I was awaiting the results from the bar exam and had a lot of free time on my hands and I was strongly opposed to the ballot measure. But generally you have to pay a decent wage for this, and it takes someone who is both intelligent and has some knowledge so that the pay can't be low or you wont' get anyone worth hiring. So, again considering all this, who's going to pay?
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 8:39 am
23 Aug 2008
hmm, well, probably not
Actually, some ad hoc volunteer groups are probably best. new blood every few months
hit and run advocacy coverage
could be a class project for a college class researching political activity
hell, a bunch of dedicated high school seniors could make the calls, and make the lists
send to the adults at Grist to make it public
shine a light where traditional media is dark
Permalink
Jon Rynn Posted 2:33 pm
24 Aug 2008
Permalink
hapa Posted 6:16 pm
24 Aug 2008
many other big players talking "grid." and europe, planning on building one. (i still think we need a pretty map like was made for their proposal.)
not that anyone asked me or would but i like the legislation route being proposed. i'd also like -- maybe first -- a list of bottlenecks to be addressed. trained hands and trained eyes that are missing from the picture, whose absence causes delays and economic hardship.
home energy auditors. well drillers for ground-source. bright green town planners. energy co-op coordinators.
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 10:25 pm
24 Aug 2008
thinks it is strategic
don't wait for that Godot
Permalink