From the U.S. Senate Committe on Environment and Public Works
Democrats Delay Global Warming Bill – Again
Obama Agenda In “Disarray”
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment & Public Works Committee, today said that he was not surprised to learn that Senate Democrats were forced once again to delay introduction of their global warming cap-and-trade bill. Throughout hearing after hearing in the EPW Committee this summer, it became apparent that Democrats were a long way off from reaching the votes necessary in the Senate to pass the largest tax increase in American history.
“The news today-that Sen. Boxer and Sen. Kerry will delay introduction of their cap-and-trade bill-came as no surprise. The delay is emblematic of the division and disarray in the Democratic Party over cap-and-trade and health care legislation-both of which are big government schemes for which the public has expressed overwhelming opposition. With the climate change debate on Capitol Hill, it’s safe to report that bipartisanship is nowhere in evidence. Cap-and-trade has pitted Democrat against Democrat, or, put another way, it centers on those in the party supporting the largest tax increase in American history against those in the party who oppose it. As to just who will win this intra-party squabble, I put money down on those representing the vast majority of the American people, who are clear that cap-and-trade should be rationed out of existence.”
In the last hearing before the EPW Committee before the August recess, Senator Inhofe spoke directly to the mounting concerns raised by Senate Democrats to cap-and-trade legislation:
Full opening statement provided below:
Climate Change and Ensuring that America Leads the Clean Energy Transformation
August 6, 2009
Madame Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today. This is the last hearing on climate change before the August recess, so I think it’s appropriate to take stock of what we’ve learned.
Madame Chairman, since you assumed the gavel, this committee has held over thirty hearings on climate change. With testimony from numerous experts and officials from all over the country, these hearings explored various issues associated with cap-and-trade-and I’m sure my colleagues learned a great deal from them.
But over the last two years, it was not from these, at times, arcane and abstract policy discussions that we got to the essence of cap-and-trade. No, it was the Democrats who cut right to the chase; it was the Democrats over the last two years who exposed what cap-and-trade really means for the American public.
We learned, for example, from President Obama that under his cap-and-trade plan, “electricity prices would necessarily skyrocket.”
We learned from Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) that cap-and-trade is “a tax, and a great big one.”
We learned from Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) that “a cap-and-trade system is prone to market manipulation and speculation without any guarantee of meaningful GHG emission reductions. A cap-and-trade has been operating in Europe for three years and is largely a failure.”
We learned from Sen. Dorgan (D-N.D.) that with cap-and-trade “the Wall Street crowd can’t wait to sink their teeth into a new trillion-dollar trading market in which hedge funds and investment banks would trade and speculate on carbon credits and securities. In no time they’ll create derivatives, swaps and more in that new market. In fact, most of the investment banks have already created carbon trading departments. They are ready to go. I’m not.”
We learned from Sen. Cantwell (D-Wash.) that “a cap-and-trade program might allow Wall Street to distort a carbon market for its own profits.”
We learned from EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson that unilateral U.S. action to address climate change through cap-and-trade would be futile. She said in response to a question from me that “U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels.”
We learned from Sen. Kerry (D-Mass.) that “there is no way the United States of America acting alone can solve this problem. So we have to have China; we have to have India.”
We learned from Sen. McCaskill (D-Mo.) that if “we go too far with this,” that is, cap-and-trade, then “all we’re going to do is chase more jobs to China and India, where they’ve been putting up coal-fired plants every 10 minutes.”
In sum, after a slew of hearings and three unsuccessful votes on the Senate floor, the Democrats taught us that cap-and-trade is a great big tax that will raise electricity prices on consumers, enrich Wall Street traders, and send jobs to China and India-all without any impact on global temperature.
So off we go into the August recess, secure in the knowledge that cap-and-trade is riddled with flaws, and that Democrats are seriously divided over one of President Obama’s top domestic policy priorities.
And we also know that, according to recent polling, the American public is increasingly unwilling to pay anything to fight global warming.
But all of this does not mean cap-and-trade is dead and gone. It is very much alive, as Democratic leaders, as they did in the House, are eager to distribute pork on unprecedented scales to secure the necessary votes to pass cap-and-trade into law.
So be assured of this: We will markup legislation in this committee, pass it, and then it will be combined with other bills from other committees. And we will have a debate on the Senate floor.
Throughout the debate on cap-and-trade, we will be there to say that:
According to the American Farm Bureau, the vast majority of agriculture groups oppose it;
According to GAO, it will send our jobs to China and India;
According to the National Black Chamber of Commerce, it will destroy over 2 million jobs;
According to EPA and EIA, it will not reduce our dependence on foreign oil;
According to EPA, it will do nothing to reduce global temperature;
And when all is said and done, the American people will reject it and we will defeat it.
Thank you, Madame Chairman.
# # #
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Przemysław Pawełczyk (01:55:39) :
“BTW A word to moderator. If you play politics, let it be played to the end.”
Please, no lectures on politics. You’re not a victim. Get over it.
Lets be clear, it is a cartel just as bent on destruction as the drug cartels are that continues to be the central issue. Why blow up a building when you can stop western commerce in its tracts by raising the price of oil? What easier way to break the back of western society then to manage the price of oil to our detriment? Oil prices went up in our town again but I know there are tanks and tanks of stored oil all over the world, held by the cartel hamperheads so they can continue to cause instability in the western world. Cap and trade is dead in the water but the central issue continues to be ignored and is far greater than CO2. Those that wish us dead supply and control the oil to the world, as well as control the price. If Obama truly wants prosperity for his country and the world, he needs to take it to the oil cartel.
A look at the bright side of current events:
http://www.seablogger.com/?p=16664
http://www.seablogger.com/?p=16657
Joe Romm is gloating and saying this best. He won’t call it what it is. It is an eye opening tax and power grab. The extremists had such a vengefull tax who you don’t like attitude and people know it. The bottom line is Obama must raise tax someway to pay debt. The best way is to lower taxes and feed growth.
The warmists have been exposed.
Their data gathering was dirty
Their theories un confirmed
The consequences of massive storms and heat all flopped.
A small core group will get nastier. Algore is pushing for Obamacare as a needed moral endeavor. The theory is if they can win, they can win again using momentum.
Which generated these responses:
All of these responses to Johnny Honda’s observation are correct (and Claude Harvey’s in particular brilliantly stated). But we should not lose sight of the fact that the underlying premise of, the ostensible rationale (the official excuse) for Cap and Tax is the assumption that CO2 if unchecked will cause the Earth to warm up and cause all manner of catastrophes.
This assumption is so sacrosanct that merely to question it is a form of heresy.
So it is vital to continually reiterate, especially to the doofuses (doofi?) in the Congress, but also to the public at large, that the assumption of man-made CO2-caused ‘climate change’ (nee ‘global warming’) is false. There is no problem, no looming catastrophe, no reason for Cap and Tax or Copenhagen or anything else.
Why? Because so long as the AGW assumption remains unchallenged, any wavering member of Congress can be pulled back into the orthodox fold by pressure from the Administration extremists who desperately want this huge stream of revenue for their own purposes, and by the useful enviro-idiots who want to save Mother Earth from the ravages of humanity.
“Yes, we know your state depends on coal, but do you really want to destroy the planet?”
Claude Harvey is right to say,
But science in this case is our ally, and to the extent that we can sow the seeds of doubt amongst the wavering faithful, to that extent will we shift the majority away from lunacy.
/Mr Lynn
In a global market place we must look at policy actions that will increase our competitive position. This is accomplished by providing more efficient and lower cost transportation, electrical energy, natural gas resources, diesel fuel, etc. etc. The Cap & Trade scheme will do exactly the opposite.
janama (06:15:07) :
It’s always good to see a typically eloquent post from the AGW side.
This politician who heads the large land use and transportation planing agency in Portland Oregon won’t like this news.
Just as he didn’t like Japan throwing out of office their eco prime minister.
http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/08/sympathique-for-former-prime-minister-taro-aso.html#comments
A beyond ridiculous read.
No politics:
http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c0120a58dcaa8970c-pi
I think it is wonderful that in the US you still have a Chamber of Commerce prepared to dissent and representatives that are still responsive to the will of the people.
Here in Britain we have handed over our democratic powers to an unelacted and democratically unresponsive EU and we have no politicains in any of our main local political parties prepared to stand up and be counted on this issue.
We also have the state owned BBC dominating our media agenda acting as if it was a paid up member of the Green Party and ever ready either to ignore or otherwise to pounce on and attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees.
For us like the rest of the Western World it is a nightmare. Can America please stand firm?. With power cuts now threatened due to these madcap policies Britain’s descent into the dark ages is about to become literal.
End of August leaves Chicago with close to 1872 cold record.
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/near.record.cold.2.1153693.html
That does not help any warmist’s agenda
Neither does the Farmers’ Almanac Long term Winterforecast for the USA and Canada.
They predict a cold cold winter: http://www.farmersalmanac.com/weather/a/frigid-2010-forecast-how-cold-will-the-winter-weather-be
Opposite opinions:
Watch the picture that shows a banner linking Katrina to AGW.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/30/AR2009083002606.html?hpid=topnews
Good advice from the Steamboat Institute:
http://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/2009/aug/29/experts_challenge_climate_crisis/
So seeing how Climate Change has morphed to Health Care change, and the dreaded socialistic takeover of the world, I take it those opposed to “socialized medicine” are
1. Too young for Medicare or
2. Too rich for Medicaid or
3. Have rejected participation in Medicare and Medicaid (and their pinko counterparts everywhere) on matters of principal and in efort to save the world.
A show of hands please-who posting has rejected their eligibility ?
Merrick (06:37:19) :
Przemysław Pawełczyk (01:55:39) :
“BTW A word to moderator. If you play politics, let it be played to the end.”
Please, no lectures on politics. You’re not a victim. Get over it.
Believe me, I will be a victim too. You are short sighted. Probably you look on Mr Inhofe from voters’ perspective, me, from abroad, try to look at the trends from higher points where such details are not visible. Let me quote:
Curiousgeorge (05:20:04) :
Does anyone seriously think that they (Obama and his cadre ) will allow Inhofe or others to get in the way of the bigger agenda?
Bucks as a world currency are going to be ditched sooner or later (rather sooner if one believes in upcoming signals). In this context cap’n’trade bill has absolutely no meaning.
Apropos my “BTW”. I was afraid my comment would be not approved hence my remark to moderator. Did I do something wrong?
Regards
It’s not a time to let down your guard. Have a look at what’s in store to try and get this off the back burner. http://twitter.com/ClimateProject just tweeted this:
“EPA to declare CO2 a dangerous pollutant, regulate ghg emissions”
http://tinyurl.com/lrfov5
Curiousgeorge (05:20:04),
Obama does not need a majority in Congress in order to rule as a dictator. He simply needs to maintain a core group of true believers that can block any veto overrides. I feel that Obama would welcome a serious loss in 2010. It would provide him with a tool to purge the Democratic Party of conservatives and moderates, and, more importantly, it will provide him an opportunity to marginalize Congress as an impediment to “Hope” and “Change”.
Direct appeal to the masses is the hallmark of 21st Century Socialism. In Latin America, the process has gone like this: An unknown academic or former military officer upsets the existing political stucture with a stunning upset victory at the polls; the new president immediately begins ruling by edict, setting up a highly centrist structure, bypassing balance-of-power controls; the Media is cowered into submition or taken over complelely, allowing no contrary views or criticisms; the existing constitutional structure is described as an impediment to progress and there is a call for a Constitutional Convention (or equivelent); a new Constitution is drawn up that gives all power to the Executive and eliminates presidential term limits (Remember, it only takes 38 states to call for a Constitutional Convention in the U.S., and the Obama people are already campaigning for it.); Businesses are expropriated, production collapses; Cuban style control structures are put in place; economy collapses, agricultural production collapses. The communist ideal of shared misery is realised.
There have been variations, and it hasn’t succeeded in every country, but that is pretty much the formula. Ecuador had to do it twice when the ex-military president tried to go independent (He was only following historical precedence. That is how Ecuador started, breaking out of Bolivar’s Gran Colombia) and was removed, to be replaced by a loyal obscure academic in the next election. Mexico came perilously close to going hard-core Socialist in the last presidential election. Chile and Peru have stayed center left, for now. Honduras legally and constitutionally impeached their center left president after he was bought by Chavez and began following the formula (for some bizarre reason, the World only recognizes elections and ignores constitutions. How would we have felt if Nixon had been impeached and then received support from NATO, the OAS and the UN to force us to reinstate him?).
I suppose that the only consolation is the knowledge that Socialism is destined to fail. It has never worked and will never work, because it denies human nature. Capitalism is based on human nature — hence its success, and its excess. The trick is harnessing Capitalism’s energy without snuffing out the flame or getting burned. Capitalism does not necessarily equate to personal freedom and can exist in a Socialist structure, as Capitalism is an economic concept and Socialism is a broader philosophy with an economic component.
Nogw (06:01:33) :
As a foreigner who pays about US$4.50 per gallon of gasoline, I would suggest you to accept or even promote a gas tax for fixing the deficit of your budget
I was going to answer this…but it would be O/T, and hijack this thread into a political debate.
Don’t forget that it is China and India who have really worked together to destroy this bill. Why say that? Because they have both agreed to refuse to any CO2 caps on their industries, which means they will have a huge manufacturing cost advantage over any US manufacturer if this passes. That’s why this bill will destroy US employment.
So why not include some tarriffs, such as the House bill proposed? Because that is a direct violation of international law as specified by multiple treaties which the US is signatory to. We dare not repudiate these without starting an international tarriff and trade war – say Hello to Smoot and Hawley, 1931 if we go down that road. Too many people know that already, which is why this cannot now be passed.
I’m betting the Senate never even gets around to introducing it thanks to the Health care fight, which means all those fools in the House who voted for Waxman-Malarkey walked the plank for nothing.
More hope:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Ron de Haan: I saw the Farmer’s almanac prediction, about the worst possible news if congress was counting on a warm winter to drum up support for the climate bill.
Heck it looks like the next 10 days here will max out at only 82 at the highest which is still about 5 degrees below average according to Intellicast last I looked.
With that in mind I guess it’s a good thing that two large cottonwood branches fell into our yard to increase our stock of firewood.
@ur momisugly Andrew Parker (09:09:56) :
Well stated. Thanks for expanding on the theme. 🙂
I do hope that this push towards Socialism or Totalitarianism or whatever strange form of government that is being manufactured by Obamas’ “Transformation of America” , fails before I do. I’ve only got about 20 years left at best, and I would prefer to die under the Constitution and freedoms that I spent 20+ years actively defending.
Steve M. (09:22:55),
I apologize for the overlong, and somewhat rambling, political commentary. I did consider adding something climate oriented, but it would have been a stretch. Nevertheless, isn’t the basic issue with AGW and its proposed mitigation the political hijacking of Science?
John Egan (00:44:29) :
James Inhofe is to one side –
What James Hansen is to the other.
Actually, No. James Hansen has also come out strongly opposed to the proposed crap and trade legislation.
The Senate is wiselyrunning for cover on Wackman-Malarky, but the unelected bureaucrats in the EPA are still intent upon regulating carbon. Given the ideology of the top EPA appointees, their regulations are likely to be draconian and at least as harmful as Cap and Trade.
People in government rarely give up power and almost never voluntarily pass on acquiring more power.