Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill: The next step – your chance for input

US-Senate

As you know, the next battle on the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill will be fought in the Senate. Maybe then they’ll read those 300+ pages added at 3:09AM the day before the house vote.

PaulM writes in “Tips and Notes to WUWT”:

At 10 am, JULY 7 there will be a Full SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL and PUBLIC WORKS Committee hearing entitled, “Moving America toward a Clean Energy Economy and Reducing Global Warming Pollution: Legislative Tools.”

Please contact your/the Senators on the Committee with your opinions. This is another important opportunity to contribute to the GW debate that we must take to the AGW’s through our politicians – as they hold our futures in their votes. If you have a Senator on the Committee at least contact him//her as well as the leaders.

Senate Majority Committee Members:

Barbara Boxer (Chairman)

Max Baucus

Thomas R. Carper

Frank R. Lautenberg

Benjamin L. Cardin

Bernard Sanders

Amy Klobuchar

Sheldon Whitehouse

Tom Udall

Jeff Merkley

Kirsten Gillibrand

Arlen Specter

Senate Minority Committee Members:

James M. Inhofe

George V. Voinovich

David Vitter

John Barrasso

Mike Crapo

Christopher S. Bond

Lamar Alexander

I suggest giving them an ear-full, quickly and often, supporting Dr. ALAN CARLIN and his suppressed “Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act”

You will also like to contact The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee members.

Advertisements

84 thoughts on “Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Bill: The next step – your chance for input

  1. all you need to know about “global warming” (aka “climate change”)
    And all you need to know about Waxman/Markey.
    Propaganda must always address itself to the broad masses of the people. (…) All propaganda must be presented in a popular form and must fix its intellectual level so as not to be above the heads of the least intellectual of those to whom it is directed. (…) The art of propaganda consists precisely in being able to awaken the imagination of the public through an appeal to their feelings, in finding the appropriate psychological form that will arrest the attention and appeal to the hearts of the national masses. The broad masses of the people are not made up of diplomats or professors of public jurisprudence nor simply of persons who are able to form reasoned judgment in given cases, but a vacillating crowd of human children who are constantly wavering between one idea and another. (…) The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood. …
    Propaganda must not investigate the truth objectively and, in so far as it is favourable to the other side, present it according to the theoretical rules of justice; yet it must present only that aspect of the truth which is favourable to its own side. (…) The receptive powers of the masses are very restricted, and their understanding is feeble. On the other hand, they quickly forget. Such being the case, all effective propaganda must be confined to a few bare essentials and those must be expressed as far as possible in stereotyped formulas. These slogans should be persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward. (…) Every change that is made in the subject of a propagandist message must always emphasize the same conclusion. The leading slogan must of course be illustrated in many ways and from several angles, but in the end one must always return to the assertion of the same formula.
    excerpt from “Mein Kampf”

  2. Well, Benedict Arlen is from PA, I’ll go after him and the rest, but I doubt this can be killed. This is why we never should have gone to popular election of senators.

  3. Sorry to sound like a pessimist, but after watching the debate on the bill in the house, I don’t think anybody will listen nor care. The democrats were all saying “we are all gonna die”. The republicans were all saying “Despite the fact that we are all gonna die, we can’t afford it”. There were precious few seconds of rational argument, and it was overwhelmed in a sea of ignorance.

  4. Is there anybody left who truly believes that the Senate listens to the American People? Come on, y’all. This will pass and will be signed into law. It’s the new America, the Land of Oppressive Taxation, where petty bureaucrats will come into our homes and ensure we are following the letter of the law.

  5. Jeff Malarkey, the twit from Oregon, is on this committee. I emailed him. The response was an obvious cut and paste from some kind of paper on global warming and green-earth economic stimulus incentive talking points that will save the planet and put people back to work in manufacturing plants right here in the US and that will put us back into first place in economic recovery and job development for US citizens and…yadda, yadda, yadda, yak, yak, yak. I would advise all committee members of this: do NOT drink the water from the table jug. Bring your own.
    Oh. I’m sorry. Did I misspell his name? My bad.

  6. I see two basic approaches in fighting Waxman-Markey.
    The first it to argue the science. Unfortunately, minds are pretty closed about this. Our politicians constantly hear about “consensus” and doomsday scenarios. They are easily swayed by the MSM misrepresentations of AGW and are not likely to be open to arguments about the science being unsettled.
    The second approach is economic issues. This is likely to get your senator’s attention because nobody wants to be blamed for losing more jobs. You can mention that cap-and-trade is all pain for no gain and the promise for green jobs has not paid off in other nations where schemes like this have been tried.
    Probably the best approach is to combine these two, with emphasis on job loss and economic impact. Politicians tend to be swayed by public opinion, so include results from the latest polls showing the public does not support the AGW agenda and does not believe it is a serious problem.
    If your senator feels enough pressure and anger from his constituents, then he may just put that above all the pork he is going to be promised in return for supporting Waxman-Markey.

  7. Here it is. It will help us to see what the Democrats (yes, my party and I voted them in) are thinking:
    “Dear Pamela,
    Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about proposals to address global warming. It is an honor to serve as your Senator, and I appreciate hearing from you.
    I believe that global warming is one of the most important issues our nation will face in my lifetime. I understand, however, concerns that constituents have raised about a cap-and-trade program or other approaches to combat global warming. I am particularly cognizant of concerns regarding the possibility that such legislation would increase energy costs for consumers and businesses.
    Any approach to addressing climate change should be designed to protect working families and small businesses from bearing disproportionate cost impacts, and to maximize job creation and other benefits. I believe that a comprehensive clean energy jobs plan, which invests in clean energy strategies in addition to a cap-and-trade program or other policy, can be enacted in a manner that limits costs while creating new jobs and directly reducing pollution. Some measures, such as energy efficiency renovations for homes and businesses, can actually reduce energy costs because consumers use less energy even as rates increase. Similarly, more fuel-efficient vehicles save consumers money because they need less gas even as gas prices rise.
    We can also do more than maximize cost savings. By moving quickly to build a clean energy economy and address climate change, we can create thousands of jobs for Oregonians and create business opportunities for companies in Oregon and across the U.S. that establish leadership in meeting clean energy needs. Oregon companies are already leaders in energy efficiency strategies, as well as solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass energy. With the help of strong renewable energy policies at the state level, these companies have been able to grow and create jobs.
    Thank you, again, for sharing your thoughts with me. Please know that I will keep your concerns in mind as I work to build a clean energy economy. I hope you will continue to keep me informed about the issues that matter most to you.
    All my best,
    Jeff Merkley
    United States Senate”

  8. If the senators are now elected by popular vote, don’t forget to include the poll results which show a majority don’t believe the hype, and point out they will likely use their vote accordingly at the next election if they pass the bill.

  9. The senate chairman, Boxer from California, is incredibly dismissive of any evidence and condescending to any witness who conflicts with her ingrained convictions that man-made CO2 is the culprit for all weather and climate occurrences. Thank goodness for the common sense of Inhofe from Oklahoma; perhaps his staunch and continued presentation of current science and economic impacts of these proposals will prevail. That being said, I will continue to contact all the committee members.

  10. Rob Wykoff,
    I don’t share your pessimism. An e-mail may be a waste of time.But a call with a strong word of protest based on good arguments and the threat to become active to unseat them should they vote for that pile of sh*t will surely unnerve them.

  11. James Inhofe is a strong, rational voice against AGW. We need to encourage him to bring the suppressed “Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act” to the committee with the rest of the minority members behind him.
    The problem is: the chair is not very bright. If Inhofe’s reasoning can catch the ear of the rest of the majority party members of the committee, there’s a chance the thing will die and a very good chance that, if not killed, it will be watered down significantly.
    It’s interesting to note that the emphasis has moved from global warming, to climate change, to a clean energy economy.

  12. The Senate will pass a watered down version, far more “moderate” to avoid a fillibuster (even with A.F., there may be some dissent). The conference committee with the House will reinstate most of the nonsense that just passed. The Senate will only need 51 votes after that, with no debate allowed.
    This thing becomes law and we may well die.

  13. What Chance Does ACES Have in the Senate?
    Simply put – – very little.
    On June 26, the American Clean Energy and Security Act passed the House 219 to 212 in a partisan vote that saw 44 Democratic representatives vote against the bill. 8 Republican representatives crossed party lines and voted for it. By the time Waxman-Markey bill got out of committee, it was a very different animal – loaded down with compromises, exceptions, and special favors. It was so compromised that Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth urged progressive representatives to vote against it.
    In fact, Dennis Kucinich and Pete DeFazio voted against the bill because it had become so bloated. DeFazio stated:
    “There’s an unholy alliance of big business, some environmental groups and Wall Street” backing cap-and-trade, said DeFazio, comparing the scheme to the deregulation of the electricity markets that ultimately led to soaring rates in some states. “Wall Street is excited about another thinly regulated market.”
    Here is a map of House members who voted contrary to their parties’ position:
    http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/9811/acescrosspartyvoting.jpg
    And a list in a more usable form:
    http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/1017/houselistaces2.jpg
    http://clerk.house.gov/
    Here is a map of senators who come from states that voted for the other party’s candidate in presidential elections:
    http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/5111/senateaces.jpg
    Eight Democratic senators are almost certain to oppose ACES:
    West Virginia – Robert Byrd
    West Virginia – Jay Rockefeller
    Alaska – Mark Begich
    Louisiana – Mary Landrieu
    Montana – Max Baucus
    Montana – Jon Tester
    North Dakota – Kent Conrad
    North Dakota – Byron Dorgan
    These senators all come from states that produce coal, oil, and/or natural gas. None of these states has voted Democratic in the past three presidential elections. Both of West Virginia’s Democratic representatives voted against ACES as well as Louisiana’s lone Democratic representative. Correct – Louisiana only has one Democratic Congressman, despite the national Democratic sweep. Begich only barely defeated a severely-tarnished Ted Stevens. Baucus, Tester, Conrad, and Dorgan also represent agricultural interests that are skeptical of ACES, as well.
    There are five more Democratic senators who come from states that are Republican trending:
    Nebraska – Ben Nelson
    South Dakota – Tim Johnson
    Arkansas – Blanche Lincoln
    Arkansas – Mark Pryor
    Missouri – Claire McCaskill
    Although these are not major energy-producing states, their Democratic senators are very Blue Dog. McCaskill has been one of Obama’s strongest supporters, but she has consistently tried to distance herself from the Democratic left. Again, not one of these senators’ home states voted Democratic in presidential elections since 2000. Nebraska and South Dakota are bedrock GOP at the presidential level. Arkansas and Missouri have trended increasingly red since the Clinton years.
    Then there are another eight Democratic senators – most recently elected – from states that have voted Republican in presidential elections with the exception of 2008.
    Virginia – Mark Warner
    Virginia – Jim Webb
    Colorado – Mark Udall
    Colorado – Michael Bennet
    North Carolina – Kay Hagan
    Ohio – Sherrod Brown
    Indiana – Evan Bayh
    Florida – Bill Nelson
    Only Mark Udall is philosophically inclined towards supporting ACES. Warner and Webb have worked to reduce coal-fired plant emissions, but support coal generation. Bennet is an unknown, but faces Colorado voters in 2010 without presidential coattails. Hagan has shown ample Blue Dog feathers, already. Brown is sensitive both to Ohio coal production as well as energy-intensive industries in his home state. Bayh is openly hostile to many of the provisions of the House version of ACES.
    And there are two more Democratic senators to consider:
    Pennsylvania – Bob Casey
    Pennsylvania – Arlen Specter
    Although Pennsylvania has voted reliably Democratic in the past 5 presidential elections and although Pennsylvania had more House seats switch from Republican to Democratic than any other state in the past four years, Pennsylvania also had more Democratic House members vote against the ACES bill than any other state. Pennsylvania remains a significant coal producer. Pennsylvania still has energy-intensive industries that are likely to be negatively impacted by ACES. And Pennsylvania has significant refinery capacity that will be impacted by ACES legislation.
    What about Republicans?
    Only four possible Republican crossover votes are out there.
    Maine – Olympia Snowe
    Maine – Susan Collins
    New Hampshire – Judd Gregg
    Iowa – Charles Grassley
    But Republicans are ideologically opposed to the American Clean Energy and Security Act, so such crossovers are unlikely. Only Gregg faces a reelection this fall in a state that is trending blue. Grassley faces reelection, too – but since corn ethanol is targeted in the ACES legislation, he may gain support by opposing it. Snowe and Collins are free to make their own decisions – which they usually do anyway.
    <>
    Where will the Democrats get 60 votes for cloture?
    Even if one assumes that Al Franken is seated prior to the energy debate in the Senate, finding 60 votes will be well nigh impossible for Harry Reid. And Reid is looking forward to the energy bill as much as someone looks forward to a root canal. Nuclear power remained outside of the House version of the legislation, but any Senate bill that might get 60 votes for cloture will involve some ugly compromises. Support of expanded nuclear power is likely to be on the table. More nuclear means more pressure for Yucca Mountain. And that is the last thing Reid wants to bring up.
    Could Reid even get the 50 votes necessary for the passage – with Joe Biden’s tiebreaker – of an ACES bill in the Senate? That is doubtful in its current configuration. In order to gain the support of energy state senators, the Senate energy bill would have to include so many structural compromises that it would be almost unrecognizable. The trickle of environmental groups that opposed the House version would become a flood. Thus, to accommodate energy state senators, Reid would likely lose support from more progressive East Coast and West Coast senators.
    I suspect that Harry Reid will allow the energy bill to die in committee rather than risk embarrassment on the floor. Such is the fate of all such legislation. There will be a “heroic” fight with many sound bites for the media. But in the long run, there will be no American Clean Energy and Security Act on President Obama’s desk.
    Reply: Unless you are johnnygunn who wrote the original, please post excerpt and link next time. ~ charles the moderator

  14. If you find it hard to educate the general public, you will find it impossible to educate public servants if they have a hidden agenda.

  15. We all will certainly die. But it isn’t global warming that will kill us. Global cooling is far more deadly. And government, with it’s insidious powers of taxing us all into poverty and starvation, is far more dangerous still.
    I will write to each member of that committee but I am so far beyond pessimistic that anything we say or do will change the course of this country (USA) prior to the 2010 elections. We are but voices in the wilderness of leftism / statism.

  16. Our next trillion dollar bubble. Enron started trading futures 20 years ago. With the help of James Hansen, they got ramped up and started wind power in California which is now owned by GE. Goldman Sachs is in the carbon trading schemes and waiting for this to kick off. I realize you all are scientists, but this is being played and funded by merchant bankers. Wind, temps and moisture are going to go up and down but goldman is playing this one big time. Just like they did IPO’s for mortgage backed securities.
    http://zerohedge.blogspot.com/2009/06/goldman-sachs-engineering-every-major.html
    Read and enjoy. There is enough chatter out there regarding “we are all gonna die” and It may be “too late to reverse” that we have legislation approved at night by lawyers that didn’t read legislation.
    Goldman Sachs underwrote and sold mortgage packages that had loans without names and a net equity of .71% in the loans. Used to be we had equity of 20%. But these trilions were nasty.
    The next bubble will again be commodities. with energy manipulation, we have to have speculation again.

  17. Here is the web Contact form for the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and the full Committee Members.
    Majority Office
    410 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg.
    Washington, DC 20510-6175
    phone: 202-224-8832
    Minority Office
    456 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg.
    Washington, DC 20510-6175
    phone: 202-224-6176
    Note especially the Green Jobs and the New Economy. Jurisdiction:

    Responsibility for issues related to job creation through the development and deployment of “green” technologies and practices. Issues also include federal investment in technologies and practices that reduce the government’s carbon footprint or the emission of other pollutants, including technologies and practices that enhance energy efficiency, conservation, or renewable power sources.

    and the
    Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Jurisdiction:

    Clean Air Act, Indoor Air, Tennessee Valley Authority, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear Plant Safety

  18. John Egan (09:49:04) :
    What Chance Does ACES Have in the Senate?
    Simply put – – very little.

    [more]
    John: Don’t underestimate any politicians capacity to sell out the interests of his/her constituents for pork-barrel projects and promises of a committee chairmanship.
    We are really going to have a hard time persuading anyone who thinks they are going to save the planet. You can not debate a fanatic, especially when they can then take on the role of savior by passing Waxman-Markey.
    Somebody save us from the people trying to save us!

  19. Full Committee hearing entitled, “Moving America toward a Clean Energy Economy and Reducing Global Warming Pollution: Legislative Tools.”
    Tuesday, July 7, 2009, 10:00 AM EDT, EPW Hearing Room – 406 Dirksen

    Witnesses
    Opening Remarks
    Panel 1
    The Honorable Steven Chu, Secretary
    United States Department of Energy
    The Honorable Lisa Jackson, Administrator
    United States Environmental Protection Agency
    The Honorable Tom Vilsack, Secretary
    United States Department of Agriculture
    Panel 2
    Rich Wells, Vice President, Energy
    The Dow Chemical Company
    David Hawkins, Director, Climate Center
    Natural Resources Defense Council
    John Fetterman, Mayor
    Braddock, Pennsylvania
    The Honorable Haley Barbour, Governor
    State of Mississippi

  20. Contacting my Senator got me this response…….
    Dear Mr. Ward,
    Thank you for contacting me about global warming and related legislation. I appreciate hearing your views on this important issue.
    In order to best protect America’s citizens and environment, I believe that we need to develop a comprehensive energy policy that both reduces our emissions and utilizes alternative sources of energy. Doing so would not only help to preserve the environment, but would also create green jobs and ultimately lower domestic energy costs. Any discussion of our national energy policy must also consider the international scope of this challenge as individual nations confront problems such as the finite supply of fossil fuels, overhauling outdated energy infrastructures, and many other important environmental challenges.
    Members of the relevant Congressional committees are currently working on legislation that would address climate change on a national level, and I look forward to participating in this debate during the 111th Congress. Though the science surrounding this issue supports the need for dramatic changes in policy, any comprehensive legislation to address climate change must balance this interest with the need to keep our economy viable during this challenging time.
    Thank you again for your input on global warming. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor related legislation and will consider your views as the Senate debates and votes on relevant legislation. I very much look forward to serving the Commonwealth during the 111th Congress.
    Sincerely,
    MARK R. WARNER
    United States Senator
    It would seem he is a “The Science is Settled” type of guy, who is trying to convince his constituents to just tow the party line. I guess the Goracle won him over when he had to debate him instead of Monckton. Oh wait…. he was sold before that, must have been one helluva debate.
    REPLY: Demand a meeting with an aide. Bring copies of graphs, reports, etc. and make it clear. – Anthony

  21. John Galt (10:27:24) :
    “Somebody save us from the people trying to save us!”
    well…..
    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
    — C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans,2002), p. 292.
    Get ready for the new Inquisition!!!

  22. Well the Hearing Title is appropriately named after reading the committee members and Witness lists, they really are Legislative Tools.
    Yet there is hope because the media is starting to get the real picture, the Whitehouse Press Briefings are starting to show reporters realizing they are being used to push the President’s adgenda and the little lightbulbs are starting to click on. Watch for some harder questions being asked…FINALLY.
    Keep up the pressure on the senate there are fewer Senators and they are a little more in tune with the public. The unemployment numbers may sweep aside this legislation when the recess is over, I suspect a Son of Stimulus will hit the Senate in the new session to be passed before the end of the year.
    Side note anyone remember the chart for the Stimulus Package that said Unemployment would only reach 8.5% if the stimulus was passed, it is 9.5% today. see My Economic Blog for a copy of the chart.
    It seems morbid to think the economy tanking will save us from the Cap and Trade Bill, but there is a bigger picture to consider and not even Obama can spin any increase in energy costs and Green Jobs in this environment.

  23. AL Ward (10:58:43) :
    “Contacting my Senator got me this response…….”
    I got the same response:
    Dear Mr. S,
    Thank you for contacting me about global warming and related legislation. I appreciate hearing your views on this important issue.
    In order to best protect America’s citizens and environment, I believe that we need to develop a comprehensive energy policy that both reduces our emissions and utilizes alternative sources of energy. Doing so would not only help to preserve the environment, but would also create green jobs and ultimately lower domestic energy costs. Any discussion of our national energy policy must also consider the international scope of this challenge as individual nations confront problems such as the finite supply of fossil fuels, overhauling outdated energy infrastructures, and many other important environmental challenges.
    Members of the relevant Congressional committees are currently working on legislation that would address climate change on a national level, and I look forward to participating in this debate during the 111th Congress. Though the science surrounding this issue supports the need for dramatic changes in policy, any comprehensive legislation to address climate change must balance this interest with the need to keep our economy viable during this challenging time.
    Thank you again for your input on global warming. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor related legislation and will consider your views as the Senate debates and votes on relevant legislation. I very much look forward to serving the Commonwealth during the 111th Congress.
    Sincerely,
    MARK R. WARNER
    United States Senator
    I don’t know the last time one did listen, or respond without a blanket reply. I guess a phone call a day is what is in order.

  24. Many states have already started and Opt out of Aces project. Please find out if yours is one of them. The way to take back our run away government is at your local level.

  25. So while CNN was telling you what happened to Michael Jackson’s chimp – Bubbles – Ohio’s representative, Marcy Kaptur, was getting a last minute bribe of a 3.5 billion dollar energy bureaucracy if she would turn her back on her coal producing state. 3.5 billion. That’s 3 times the amount Obama cut from missile defense.
    Language was being written into the bill to regulate how you light pretty much anything, how trees can be planted, what has to be done to your home before you can sell it, how you can burn wood, or heat your home in general. They want to know how many times you flush your toilet. And the list goes on. Massive bureaucracies will be set up to watch you do all this stuff. That’s what they mean by “green jobs”.
    More language was written into the bill quietly creating the possibility of carbon tariffs. This means you’re looking at a possible coming trade war.
    The average guy doesn’t know any of this. The MSM is not telling them. Maybe the first thing to do is to back these grassroot campaigns popping up to let people know something is happening in Washington they should know about. Chris Horner was talking about black ribbon campaigns where you tie a black ribbon onto anything which will be affected directly by cap and trade. The tea party people are talking protests. There could be more. Perhaps they should be supported.

  26. Pamela-Smerkley is a peach,ain’t he.John Egan-you are right about it possibly
    croaking in comittee-by Ried who is in a tight race against-from what I hear- a Republican named “Generic”.No, this isn’t a done deal.They aren’t ready to pull the trigger,DeFazio-D Bule Southern Island,Oregon, is my old congresscritter-he will say it like it is.So will Greg Walden-R Red Sea ,Oregon. all the others here have drunk the warmist Kool-Aid…

  27. On the assumption that the Senate is more of a club than the House, here are link to all senators:
    http://www.webslingerz.com/jhoffman/congress-email.html
    I don’t know about other committee members, but some of these guys, like Tom Udall, from New Mexico, are serious environmentalists. His cousin Mark, the senator from Colorado, was head of Colorado Outward Bound for a decade, and the Udall family is a dynasty that goes back several generations in the area. Mo and Stewart Udall may be names familiar to Westerners.
    It might be worth remembering that “environmentalism” is one facet of a back-to-nature movement in the West, and I respectfully submit that most readers here embrace some values in common with these leaders, notwithstanding the perversions of the AGW agenda(s).
    During the House vote, I tossed off a choleric letter to my district rep the day before he stood up and endorsed the bill. Despite an automated e-mail that said I would hear from his office, I haven’t heard back and I’m not holding my breath.
    I’ve heard that there’s a pay-off in writing an “angry letter” to one’s senator, but I’d be curious to know: how many from WUWT who wrote that kind of e-mail to their representative got back a reply.
    It’s hard to know whether senate aides will be any different. If, as time grows short, they are merely ticking off “for” and “against” opinions, not printing out the e-mails, and not responding, the theat to “vote them out” may be as effective as a reasoned essay against AGW. Still, I’m going to try more reasonable tone this time, and let them know that I expect a reply.

  28. Elections have consequences … such as SECTION RESERVED
    http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/01/here-is-the-cap-and-tax-placeholder-wheres-the-fine-print/
    PART H—DISPOSITION OF ALLOWANCES
    Sec. 781. Allocation of allowances for supplemental reductions.
    Sec. 782. Allocation of emission allowances.
    Sec. 783. Electricity consumers.
    Sec. 784. Natural gas consumers.
    Sec. 785. Home heating oil and propane consumers.
    Sec. 787. Allocations to refineries.
    Sec. 788. SECTION RESERVED.
    Sec. 789. Climate change rebates.

  29. Can’t someone put together a brief and professional 5 page summary of the science as you see it, plus some examples demonstrating this is not ‘unprecedented’and get these to the Senators?
    No ranting. No raving. No extreme politics which will alienate one side or the other. Just a calm and measured appraisal. It could usefully have an appendix of the qualifications of the people on ‘our’ side together with selected further reading of pertinent articles here and at Climate Audit.
    Tonyb

  30. Why do I feel like I’m pissin’ into the wind in my efforts to stop this monstrosity? I guess it’s because my trousers are getting wet. Maybe Ambrose Bierce can provide some solace:
    Freedom
    FREEDOM, as every schoolboy knows,
    Once shrieked as Kosciusko fell;
    On every wind, indeed, that blows
    I hear her yell.
    She screams whenever monarchs meet,
    And parliaments as well,
    To bind the chains about her feet
    And toll her knell.
    And when the sovereign people cast
    The votes they cannot spell,
    Upon the lung-impested blast
    Her clamors swell.
    For all to whom the power’s given
    To sway or to compel,
    Among themselves apportion heaven
    And give her hell.
    Ambrose Bierce

  31. John Egan (09:49:04) :
    What Chance Does ACES Have in the Senate?
    Simply put – – very little.

    Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are sellouts. Simply put, they cave under pressure every time.
    I suspect we’re going to get a watered-down version of a climate bill (with the usual heavy pork on the side), and that will be good enough to bury this economy for the forseeable future.
    We’re fast approaching a tipping point, and I’m not talking about global warming.

  32. I have written to conservative members of congress (not in my own district, since I live here in the great green northwest) suggesting that this website be mandatory daily reading for all conservatives. AGW presents the best opportunity for conservatives to regain the respect of the public. I personally think the proper approach in debating this issue is not to politely debate the cost, or even to present opposing informed scientific opinion…because closed minds aren’t listening….but instead, confident, blunt, unapologetic, common sense logic that even the weak minded can understand: If the IPCC said in their most recent study that oceans will rise 2~3mm/yr, someone needs to point out that this is equivalent to HALF the length of a grain of rice… and to follow that with the observation that the Tide in (AK for example) can easily exceed 20 feet. The argument should emphatically state that AGW is a SCAM. The purveyors of doom and their propaganda should not be given the respect of a polite point/counterpoint scientific discussion. (It’s my opinion) ….Because this (blunt) approach could peel the veneer of respectability from the AGW hypothesis. This is about winning, and doing so needn’t be pretty.

  33. This thing might pass, but in doing so, it will assure via the ensuing energy price calamity, that the Democratic Control of Congress will voted out come mid-term. It could conceivably be so bad that the President might resign.
    Like rolling a 50 ton boulder down a hill, it will make it’s own gravy, and no regulations will stop it, given the slowness to react by regulators (if it will even have any).
    This is CDO level high-risk for the Dems and the Left.
    Posters who have tried understand the stonewall.
    The last time I got a real response out of Barbara Boxer was the Energy Bill prior to the primaries. It was the DST extension. Her response was “there were no other plans on the table”. The end result was the outsourcing of GE, Sylvania and Westinghouse to China, where all your CFL’s not come from. The sweeteners were very expensive.
    The sweeteners in this bill are bound to be exorbitant and deadly to our economy.
    If you live in a State where you have a Republican Senator, give them your support. That’s the 1 and only way you have to get through.
    Understand how deplorable this is to the GOP, and understand the pressure the Dem is under to pass this in support of their Left agenda.
    The GOP wants to fight this.
    The DEM is closed.

  34. Laugh for today.
    Just found this comment on a science blog:
    Global warming. Climate change. These are incomplete expressions.
    I propose CACA (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alteration). This covers everything.
    Some proper uses of the acronym:
    – “Some are into antiques. Some are into sports. Albert
    Gore is into CACA.”
    – “NASA’s James Hansen is a CACA expert.”
    – Exchange between 2 climatologists:
    “How’s that CACA study going?”
    “Please wait until I get out of the latrine.”
    Reply: That post just barely squeezed through. ~ ctm

  35. I’m told that emails are not effective and get discarded easily. Your senator may differ, but snail mail and phone calls seem more effective.
    Your senator has at least one in-state local office plus the office in D.C. Call both.

  36. Beggin’ yer pardon sir….
    “300+ pages added at 3:09AM the day before the house vote.”
    Here on the Great Plains it was 2:09 A. M. OF the day the House vote.
    Which my HP35 suggests was 3:09 A. M. OF the House vote.
    Although one is never sure what time zone the District of Chicago is in on any given day.

  37. Quote:
    John Egan (09:49:04) :
    What Chance Does ACES Have in the Senate?
    “But Republicans are ideologically opposed to the American Clean Energy and Security Act, so such crossovers are unlikely. Only Gregg faces a reelection this fall in a state that is trending blue.”
    Update: Gregg has decided not to run for reelection and he has been speaking out against the current administration after he declined to take the cabinet post offered by Obama.

  38. @John Egan
    Wow quite the comprehensive analysis of the politics behind this. One thing that I disagree with though is that Mark Begich despite being from Alaska will more than likely vote for it. He isn’t up for re-election for a long time, and has never been a pro oil guy.

  39. Much as we like to discuss this topic as it reflects the state of being presently – we are convinced it is pointless. The preponderance of facts have clearly falsified the global warming arguments but with the infantile chokehold the media and pundits exercise – it has become clear they are incapable of honesty. It is frankly an utterly corrupt agency bent on anything but coming clean.
    The alarmists have been reduced to claiming any opposition arises from brain-damaged scientists and critics – accepting no responsibility for their actions. The political exercise is virtually dead, a joke reflecting even the failure of the educational process. In these type sims where there is no personal responsibility or common sense required – it is little more than playing Parchesee with loaded dice.
    To quote the Supreme Court: “… no socially redeeming value.”

  40. As a former Virginian , I’m not surprised by Warner’s response . I also have grave doubts about at least one of my current senators : Isaakson . Chambliss is ok , I hope . I’m considering contacting Mike Crapo , my former senator , I have no idea how he stands on this , but he is up for reelection next year . A few days ago , I heard Bayh state flatly that climate change is “real” . However , he is up for reelection as well – he might listen if enough pressure is put upon him .

  41. The final version of W-M with the amendments is available:
    http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h2454eh.txt.pdf
    A couple of talking points:
    1. The bill is full of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage restrictions. This is great for construction trade unions, but not so hot for people building clean energy projects. This increase the costs from anywhere 5% to 34%. Search “wages” in the PDF. Sometimes they call out Davis-Bacon by name and other places they use the USC. If the Senator is pro-nuke, then point out they applied Davis-Bacon to the Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program for Nuclear plant construction created by the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
    2. If the Senator is from a farm state, point out that even though carbon offsets for agriculture are administered by the Secretary of Agriculture and not the EPA, the President can replace the Secretary of Agriculture anytime he wants and they will be in the same condition as if the EPA was administering it directly. Do they really want to wake up one day and find out that Joe Romm is Secretary of Agriculture?

  42. Re David Hagen 10:31:21,
    EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is scheduled to testify before the committee on Tuesday 7/7. Let’s hope someone takes the opportunity to ask her about Alan Carlin’s suppressed EPA report!

  43. A few months ago , I stumbled across a paper written by two researchers from the U of Illinois (I think) . Essentially , it came to conclusions similar to that from Juan Carlos U in Spain . Does anyone know how to find this ? Coming from the US , this might carry more weight than the vaunted – but largely ignored Spanish one . Thanks .

  44. I’ve emailed Alabama’s senators Shelby and Sessions several times this year on this issue alone. I don’t really think either will support this, but I will call their offices on Monday to stress the point.

  45. Reply: That post just barely squeezed through. ~ ctm
    Feel free to remove it. I may have found it funny but that doesn’t mean it has value. ~ ctm
    Reply: And you didn’t get my joke. ~ ctm

  46. After my senator voted for the TARP bill I sent him an e-mail saying that he should be in jail. Since then his responses have been rather brief, like this;
    “Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. I will certainly keep your views in mind should this issue come before the Senate.”

  47. Retired Engineer (09:45:49) :

    The Senate will pass a watered down version, far more “moderate” to avoid a fillibuster (even with A.F., there may be some dissent). The conference committee with the House will reinstate most of the nonsense that just passed. The Senate will only need 51 votes after that, with no debate allowed.

    I don’t think that’s correct. As I understand it, the conference report is debatable and can be filibustered unless it’s a budget reconciliation bill.

  48. Michael Gerson wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post to the effect that we should honor the Republican representatives who voted their convictions.
    Nonsense. By voting for it, they proved they’re not fit to serve. I wrote back to Mr. Gerson saying that they should be held accountable (along with the other representatives who voted for it). Really, wouldn’t you fire an employee who signed a contract on your behalf without reading it?

  49. I’d like to comment on some R senators. First, New Hampster’s Gregg is NOT facing re-election as he has announced he’s retiring from the Senate. He’s a RINO who often votes with trendy public opinion. He may be persuadeable. However FYI, last year he voted with the D majority for comprehensive immigration reform, a.k.a. amnesty for illegal aliens.
    As to Maine’s Snowe and Collins, these RINOS are reliable voters for D measures that the mainstream media portrays as needed, q.v. the oh so effective stimulus bill. As female Senators they’re nearly invulnerable. Neither is a deep thinker and their opinion on energy and AGW is formed by NYT editorials often praising them for their ‘inedpendent’ views, translate as voting with the Democratic majority.

  50. This was my response from Sen. Barrasso this Feb. He is second only to Inhofe when it comes to this. Lately he has been on the cable news promoting 2nd amendment rights and trying to rally against the climate con.
    Dear Steven,
    Thank you for contacting me about global climate change. It is good to hear from you.
    Like you, I find some of the proposals to address global climate change to be potentially devastating to our nation’s economy. While I believe energy efficiency and conservation are important pieces of any energy policy, coal, natural gas, and oil cannot be eliminated from America’s energy portfolio. Coal, natural gas, and oil must continue to play a central role in meeting America’s energy demands. Be assured that I will fight tirelessly in favor of policies promoting the use of Wyoming’s abundant energy resources.
    Steven, thanks again for sharing your thoughts with me. I look forward to hearing from you in the future.
    John Barrasso, M.D.
    United States Senator

  51. @ Hu McCulloch (13:20:03) :
    Re David Hagen 10:31:21,
    EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is scheduled to testify before the committee on Tuesday 7/7. Let’s hope someone takes the opportunity to ask her about Alan Carlin’s suppressed EPA report!
    Barbour might, and maybe Vilsack. The rest are in Obama’s bag.

  52. Charles the moderator – –
    John Egan = Johnnygunn
    Reply: I can’t believe I didn’t see that. D’oh! ~ charles the contrite and embarrassed moderator

  53. I sent letters to almost all Senators the very day after the House shamefully voted yes on this thing. Senator Lieberman wrote back a nice, lengthy letter supporting the bill. They have convinced him that climate change is the “most important environmental challenge of our time”. He also seems frantically concerned with leaving an “environmental legacy”. He referred to an April 17th report by the EPA. I wrote back and asked if he had seen Mr. Carlin’s more recent report that has been squelched… I can’t believe our own Jeff Flake “flaked out” of even voting… Let’s pray that by the time the Senate touches this thing, they’ve all received an earful from fed-up folks like us. Here is the text of what I wrote to each Senator. Feel free to plagiarize if you think it’s worth it:
    “We are beside ourselves with what just happened on Friday in the House of Representatives. HR 2454 passed. This is yet another in a series of unprecedented moves by the current Administration and Congress to turn America into something much less than the great nation we have been. We are not Europe. We don’t want to be Europe. Nevermind the fact that similar efforts to the experiments being embarked upon here have FAILED in Europe and other parts of the world! Why would we mimic them? Are there some in Congress who feel so power drunk and so secure in their positions that they would presume to change the whole face of our nation? They ought to clean out their ears and open their eyes. The American people are starting to wake up and may just vote them all out of office…
    We hope, Senator, that you are not in favor of this power grab. We pray that you believe in States’ and, more importantly, individual rights and freedoms. Please demonstrate this commitment by voting “no” when this bill comes to the Senate, even if this means “crossing party lines”, as it were.”

  54. “Mikey (11:17:09) :
    This means you’re looking at a possible coming trade war.”
    I see a new country forming as direct result of this bill. I call it “Chimerica”. In Chimerica you have producers and financiers (China) and consumers (America). This will continue until one stops lending money to the consuming side of the equasion. War is on the agenda.

  55. You all have to remember the one and simple fact that all politicians, including assistants, family members etc etc, will benefit enormously from this bill. And the likes of you and I will pay for it. It will pass, as similar bills passed in Europe (And have demonstrated their power in raising revenues) and will in Australia (After Copenhagen).
    Crickey! In Australia, we have ex-MP’s clocking up AU$50k in air travel costs in 6 months. They”re not even active MP’s FFS. This is the sort of corruption we’ll see more of.

  56. My God! Boxer is the committee chair. I live in Southern California, but do you think she would listen to anything I (or any of us) have to say. I… I…
    I wrote Harman an email about Waxman-Markey. Guess how she voted?

  57. I just wrote a message to Senator Voinovich (R-Ohio). I’ll be interested to see if I receive a specific reply or a canned message. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) did send a sepcific reply (which was most appreciated, even if an aide did it) and she voted against this C&T in the House. Like others, I’m concerned that there will be too many concessions (concealed bribes) and this nation-killer will be enacted. I’m making plans to spend the rest of my life in an upcoming third-world country where I don’t have to worry about cold and electricity rates are affordable. I’ll take a cut in pay, but I’ve live better than I will if this piece of legislation passes.

  58. Pamela G. is right. Malarkey (Merkley) is a total sap. He was when he was in the State legislature and he is now. I have received more [snip] replies from him, be it on gun legislation or GW stuff, than I can count. They are all of the same slick grease that [snip] replies are known for.
    Also, our Governor has drunk so much of the warmist koolaid that OR is a lost cause from ever opting out from this coming ruination of American industry and economy.

  59. Here is the reply I received from one of my Senators, who basically admits there will be job losses:
    Thank you for writing to me to express your opposition to establishing a cap-and-trade system to curb greenhouse gas emissions. I appreciate the time you took to write, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
    I understand that you are concerned that a cap-and-trade system could result in the loss of American jobs and increase energy costs. I believe, however, that the cost of failing to act to address climate change far exceeds the cost of taking the necessary steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make a permanent shift towards clean, renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. A recent study by researchers at Tufts University found that inaction could cost the United States economy as much as 3.6 percent of the gross domestic product, or $3.8 trillion annually, by 2100.
    Please know that I appreciate hearing your concerns, and I will keep your thoughts in mind as I continue working in the Senate to advance measures that address climate change, invest in our economy and increase our energy security.
    Again, thank you for writing. If you have further questions or comments, please contact my office in Washington, D.C. at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.
    Sincerely yours,
    Dianne Feinstein
    United States Senator

  60. Myron Mesecke (14:28:14) :
    Reply: That post just barely squeezed through. ~ ctm
    Feel free to remove it. I may have found it funny but that doesn’t mean it has value. ~ ctm
    Reply: And you didn’t get my joke. ~ ctm
    Good stuff gents.
    Hopefully this Cap and Trade CACA motion will not pass in the Senate…

  61. Steve (22:37:58) :
    “A recent study by researchers at Tufts University found that inaction could cost the United States economy as much as 3.6 percent of the gross domestic product, or $3.8 trillion annually, by 2100.”
    More importantly another recent study from Justfundus University found 8 out of 10 Americans will believe any idiotic assertion containing the word “study”.

  62. All great comments and good ideas here but only a few touched on what will really grab the attention of the masses and the politicos and that’s MONEY!…
    Consider the costs in the following courtesy of Steven Milloy’s ‘Green Hell blog: Waxman-Markey lays groundwork for electric vehicle mandate
    There is some serious jack involved in transitioning to these ‘wind up electric toy cars‘…
    We of course can’t expect the MSM to honestly and factually inform us of the real situation as Frank Strategies blog shows us: Video: Economic Reporting – Then and Now
    One of the seriously great thing about this particular blog Anthony Watts has put together here is that not only are the posts just a bit beyond excellent but the comments are also very much a learning experience too…
    Thanks all…

  63. Please do not punish me and my family with additional taxes. Please do not suppress science that is contrary to your agenda. The free market is already ramping up its wind resources. Please let the market work!

  64. [snip too crude for posting here – please don’t post this sort of thing again – Anthony]

  65. No more crude than this posted above “Hopefully this Cap and Trade CACA motion will not pass in the” I had the courtesy to ** the only offensive word in the whole post. Get a grip.

    REPLY:
    Your HANDLE is offensive, get a grip yourself. – Anthony

  66. did you read these? “Why do I feel like I’m pissin’ into the wind in my efforts to stop this monstrosity?”
    The handle is no more offensive than other poster’s content Anthony

  67. I think you have lost it dude. I didn’t apply anything to Helen Thomas – she never came up. I respect her immensely and wouldn’t want to tangle with her. You on the other hand are playing censor and that annoys me.
    REPLY: You are correct, I confused you with another silly handle “n.o.brain” who did attack Helen Thomas. I removed my reply to you. I wish I didn’t have to snip any of these sorts of comments. But I do to maintain decorum. Am I perfect, no. Do some get missed from time to time, yes. I call ’em when I see ’em.
    Best just to behave and not post words that are best left to street talk. And you might wish to consider changing your handle. It immediately sets you up to be viewed with little or no respect. Be annoyed if you wish, I’ve got other things to worry about. – Anthony

  68. I would suppose that with such a well-thought handle, democrapper is a member of the intelligently designed right.
    See how stereotypes are perpetrated? You have, to quote a famous line from The Hunt For Red October, “You arrogant [something], you haven’t killed them, you’ve killed us!”
    REPLY: I agree Pamela. Labeling, name calling and regurgitation of stereotypical views only serves to build walls when rational debate is what is sorely needed. – Anthony

  69. David Hagen (7/2, 10:31:21) also notes that Energy Secretary Steven Chu will be the lead witness before the Senate Environment committee on Tuesday 7/7.
    Perhaps one of the committee members will ask him why, if merely changing the albedo of roofing will make a significant dent in global warming per his statement on 5/27, the ruinous cap-and-trade bill is being promoted instead of this far less costly approach?
    The State of Florida has issued a recent study of roofing materials showing that some have much better properties in this respect than others. Has the US government adopted guidelines that all new roofing or replacement roofing on government buildings in AC-intensive climates should conform to a high standard of solar reflectivity and FIR emissivity? Is there a program in place to educate homeowners and businesses that following Washington’s example would be in their own self-interest?
    If not, why not? Is it because the administration’s real agenda is not GW but control of energy?
    (Chu was earlier hung up by Congressman Barton on the issue of how there happen to be oil deposits in northern Alaska. It would be fun to press him on this issue, but I think that the issue of whether government building codes incorporate his albedo recommendation would be a better use of limited question time.)
    I personally doubt that even converting all roofing to high-reflectivity materials would make much of a dent in global temperatures, given what a small fraction of the earth’s surface roofs are. However, it could still be very beneficial in terms of alleviating urban temperatures and in terms of reduced AC usage. If everyone who voted for Al Gore in 2000 and who has built a new house or had to replace their roof since then had followed the Florida study’s recommendations, there would already have been a huge change in urban albedo.

  70. Here you need a laugh you take yourself way too seriously. You can laugh right?
    [ snip, off topic parody ]

  71. that was just for you – I never thought it would get posted.
    REPLY: Well in that case, it was funny, thanks – A

  72. All,
    I have a suggestion. Provided it’s legal (and I have no reason to believe it isn’t legal, but then I’m not a lawyer), identify 5 to 10 senators who in your opinion are (a) in a tight senate race, and (b) likely to vote for ACES. Call their offices and tell the person who answers the phone that you’ll be watching how the senator votes on the ACES bill, and that if the senator votes FOR the ACES bill, you will send $10 to his political opponent in the next election. Then do it. One such phone call will have no effect. 10,000 such phone calls might.
    Reed Coray

  73. To say “The problem is: the chair [Senator Boxer] is not very bright” [Pieter F (09:45:16)] is comparable to saying ‘the Pacific Ocean is not very dry’ — both statements are true, but neither statement represents reality. The Pacific Ocean is very wet, and Barabara Boxer is very stupid.

  74. Stupid U.S. Politicians
    The concept of savvy politicians is all wrong. Remember “Gulliver’s Travels” Especially the part where the foreign king could not hear, until one of his servants smacked him across the ear with a soft baseball bat? Also, the king could not speak unless a servant smacked him across the mouth with the padded bat.
    This is almost exactly what we have today, with elected officials hearing and reading only what their staffs have carefully filtered and allowed them to hear.
    Politicians speak in carefully chosen words written by their staff, and usually only when their staff and advisers have chosen the time, place, and manner. Even a supposedly “spontaneous” Town-Hall type performance is just that, a well-rehearsed and practiced performance sometimes worthy of an Academy Award.
    Rep. Waxman deserves a Razzy, for bungling his lines so badly. Or a better staff, who can actually write.
    Who can forget Billy Boy Clinton and his cronies yukking it up at a funeral, until they realized a news camera was rolling. They instantly jumped back into character, with long faces and sad expressions. Method acting, apparently? Another Razzy?
    ====================================
    Quote of the week (26 04 2009) – Waxman’s stunningly stupid statement
    This QOTW is from Congressman Henry Waxman, who is pushing (or maybe bribing) the carbon cap and trade bill through congress. The statement made by Waxman can be corrected by a third grader; it’s that bad.
    From an interview on NPR as relayed by Tavis Smiley:
    “We’re seeing the reality of a lot of the North Pole starting to evaporate, and we could get to a tipping point. Because if it evaporates to a certain point – they have lanes now where ships can go that couldn’t ever sail through before. And if it gets to a point where it evaporates too much, there’s a lot of tundra that’s being held down by that ice cap..”
    That’s probably the scariest statement on “science” ever uttered by a Congressman. Waxman is stunningly and stupidly misinformed and intellectually inadequate for the tasks at hand that bears his name: The Waxman-Markey bill
    This is what Waxman works on in Congress:
    Committee on Energy and Commerce (Chairman)
    * Subcommittee on Health
    * Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
    * Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
    Write or call your US representatives now.

  75. Well, I wrote to every senator on the Senate Environmental and Public Works committee last night in anticipation of tomorrow’s hearings with Jackson and Chu, and plan to call Voinovich later today. Calls and letters from their own consitutuents count much more than those from other states.

Comments are closed.