"...other environmental groups like Sierra Club are working hard to improve the bill -- and are reserving judgment until the final details are hammered out..."

A functional democracy requires compromise.

There is little point to "improving" a bill if the result is... it dies in committee, doesn't get approved by the House if it leaves committee, doesn't get approved by the Senate if it leaves the House, or gets rejected by the King if it leaves the Senate and the Legislature cannot collect enough votes to override a veto.

Is this a choice between a climate bill that tries to get the ball rolling and no climate bill at all?

Perhaps Environmental Defense recognizes that we need some legislation, even if not perfect, RIGHT NOW And the newly elected Democratic President and Democratically controlled Federal Legislature  that assumes greater power in 2009 will be able to approve better legislation.

If Congress does not accomplish something useful soon, progressive representatives are going to suffer in the next election. Perhaps Ralph Nader will make sure Guliani or Romney gets elected President. Congress has already dropped the ball as far as extracting us from the quagmire in Iraq is concerned and will probably allow the King to continue His Holy Crusade by attacking Iran. Now "environmentalists" want to undermine efforts to pass a climate bill.

Please, let Congress accomplish SOMETHING useful. They can build on it during the next session.

Doe it always have to be ALL OR NOTHING???!!!

No wonder the environmental movement is imploding even as Americans become more concerned about the environment.

Another victim of Jean-Paul Marat's ghost and his virtual guillotine?

Yes, it has to be all or nothing, because if it isn't , you get squashed and chopped up in the big soup of compromise, and the really tough demands will never be addressed once the diluted legislation is passed. ED is not a friend though decades ago it led the country in banning DDT. It is now an appendage of corporations who greenwash themselves, a more lucrative location for ED with its huge overhead and reliance on the wealthy funders and conservative foundations who fund only those who don't rock the boat..of which ED is the prime example. The trouble with all the environmentalists today is that they don't regard legislation the same way they regard ethical or moral principles. If someone asked us to soften our demands on racism in order to get the foot in the door or get something that is "better than nothing", how would we respond? "It's too early...".."we will lose some support from some whites"...."we will be regarded as radicals"....etc, ad nauseum. We are fighting a HUGE moral as well as ecological battle to save the planet, and if we willingly sacrifice our scientifically based demands and goals, we cede the power to ED and the other corporate-controlled enviros who regard the environment as a job, not as a cause. The only way the environmental community can regain its credibility and legitimacy is to hold firm and then bring the public and elected officials along. The old anti-nuclear power movement did exactly that: it said NO NUKES, not "nuclear moratorium", and guess what, folks? It won. It took a while but the politicos and the media and the public all eventually came around. If the compromisers (like NRDC, ED, and even Sierra Club) had been heeded, we would have a hundred more nukes operating today. We stopped the industry in its tracks, pretty much, and it won't have an easy time getting back in business no matter what you read to the contrary. So sidestep around ED and the other sell-outs, and revive the fundamental unwavering environmental principles that we established after so much hard work, and kick the compromisers out into the cold where they can freeze their butts off sucking up to tricky congressmen who are afraid to stand up to utilities, the coal industry and the global warming deniers.

Glenn sez:

Now we're debating how quickly a centrist "consensus" bill should move toward 100% auctions -- auctions that will provide billions in funding for energy conservation, efficiency, and technology as well as vital forest conservation.

to which I have to say, since we're talking about the future here, that it's way past time to stop passing over the adaptation and just transtions issues. This is not just an "environmental issue." There are going to be lots of losers, and we have to take care of them, or this thing is going nowhere.

For crying out loud people!

-- toma

Tom Athanasiou (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) //= 0; i=i-1){ if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') output += "&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";"; else output += unescape(l[i]); } document.getElementById('eeEncEmail_uS709k21E8').innerHTML = output; //]]>