Climate bill delayed and in "disarray"

From the U.S. Senate Committe on Environment and Public Works

Democrats Delay Global Warming Bill – Again

EPW_logo

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.

# # #

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

118 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
M White
September 1, 2009 10:39 am

Curiousgeorge (06:19:19)
“Once legislation mandates power companies and other industries to curb emissions, economists expect CO2 to trade for between $15 and $30 per ton”
Perhaps the power producers will just shut down the power stations and sell their credits

Douglas DC
September 1, 2009 10:39 am

Steve S. (07:25:03) :
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.
Yes- I just returned from the Blue Island of Portland,Nw Portland is an Eco friendly
part of Portland,Trolley Caternary Wires every where,using power from? Dams?
Boardman Coalfired Plant?All the freaking windmills on the Columbia hills?I saw the
Trolleys and -no- passenger load to speak of. The streets were loaded with Piouses,BMW’s and Mercedes.I predict-the first icestorm in the Portland area-not snow-ice and the whole thing will collapse like a house of cards.Also I see the windmills having big problems too-with ice.Going home to NE Oregon-LaGrande,
I felt like an astronaut returning to my home planet..
FTA that was linked”Little Tomato” feh. The Japanese are whole heartedly going Nuke-including Oregon’s own designed”Pebble Bed” reactors.Japan is not Oregon or even Portland…

September 1, 2009 10:53 am

Part of the Senate’s delay in addressing a Cap and Trade bill is the void (and the vote) presented by Ultra-Liberal Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy’s death. They (the Democrats) likely want to defer such an important bill until his seat is filled, preferably by another Democrat who will toe the party line.
This is a big gamble, though, as the winter forecast is for a cold and grim winter. The blogosphere (but not the mass media) will have great fun contrasting the deep snow, gridlocked cities, very cold temperatures, etc. with a Senate debating how to prevent global warming.
This will be highly entertaining to watch, and blog about. I encourage all bloggers to maximize your efforts to point out how badly wrong the IPCC predictions are.
(IPCC = incompetents predicting climate catastrophe)

William
September 1, 2009 11:21 am

Keep in mind that the passage of a Bill like Waxman Markey is not about how to best adopt a strategy to stop global warming. It’s about how to take power from business or the public and transfer it to government control. Once adopted the Government will have authority to tax and control all kinds of areas currently beyond their control in the name of AGW reduction. Permits for fireplaces, taxes on firewood, allocations of Charcoal briquettes, regulations on the color of roofs, cars you must buy, local and state requirements that will have to be met or suffer the loss of federal tax dollars. It’s all about power and money and has nothing to do with Climate Science. That’s why the AGW argument is essentially over, now it’s all about how to slice up the money pie.
The alternative argument to AGW is just not a political winner. the argument that, Climate is a cycle, we cannot control it and therefore do not have to modify any energy policies, temperatures and the height of the oceans are not going to change much and we don’t have to worry about drowning the polar bears is just not something that will whip people up into voting for someone to replace the current pro AGW government.
Thanks
William

Nogw
September 1, 2009 11:25 am

Andrew Parker (09:09:56) :
Well explained the Chavez’s formula of his 21st.century socialism (however I think he is not so clever to have planned all this, there are some behind, perhaps at the UN).
If applied in the USA it will be also a total failure as it was in any place where socialism was applied.
There is also a christian/catholic version of it: “The Gospel of Liberation”, authored by the peruvian “father” Gutierrez, which has been silenced by a papal order beause his “Gospel” supposed the existence of heaven on earth to be reached through a marxist “struggle of the masses”.

Nogw
September 1, 2009 11:29 am

Roger Sowell (10:53:58) :
IPCC= INTERNATIONAL PROGRESSIVE COMUNIST CONSPIRACY

Atomic Hairdryer
September 1, 2009 11:32 am

Re: CPT. Charles (23:57:17) :
Typical politicians.
Could it be that the common ‘whispered’ question amongst the dems is: ‘how do we survive this mess we’ve created’?

Probably the usual way politicians survive. Look for a scapegoat. In this case, perhaps poor/misleading/inconclusive scientific advice.
So blame the UN IPCC, once you’ve found a way to shield or else sacrifice a few US scientists who became a little too politically active and lost objectivity.

F. Ross
September 1, 2009 11:36 am

Good for Senator Inhofe and good for the rest of us.
Now if we could just get the SCOTUS to reverse its judgment on CO2 [as a “pollutant”] and the EPA to disappear into the woodwork, maybe the nation could begin to recover from the mess we are in.

F. Ross
September 1, 2009 12:00 pm

” Mr Lynn (06:59:44) :
…So it is vital to continually reiterate, especially to the doofuses (doofi?) in the Congress..”
Doofi! love it.

Andrew Parker
September 1, 2009 12:02 pm

M White (10:39:39): “Perhaps the power producers will just shut down the power stations and sell their credits.”
Perhaps this will prove a boon for power plant construction — like crop subsidies that pay a farmer for acreage not planted? How about credits for coal not mined?

davidgmills
September 1, 2009 12:06 pm

Typical Republican — about half right.
77% of the American people favor a public option for health care.

Nogw
September 1, 2009 12:13 pm

Atomic Hairdryer (11:32:37) :
Do you have any preferences about who would be your choice for that “scientist scapegoat”?
It could be perhaps a matter of a poll, here, in WUWT. 🙂

John Galt
September 1, 2009 12:24 pm

(07:56:46) :
Dan (07:56:46) :
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 ?

What’s your point? Do I get to opt of of participating in those programs or do you expect to confiscate money out of every paycheck I have ever made and will ever make and then deny me benefits? Do I get a refund, plus interest for everything I’ve paid?
Congress has exempted themselves from Social Security and MediCare. They do not have payroll deductions for those entitlements but instead get fully taxpayer supported pensions and other benefits. Like others who support the public option, Congress has also exempted themselves from that, too.
And please don’t try to tell us that anybody who opposes ObamaCare is opposed to reform or selfish. Health care reform is needed but a government take-over is not necessary. It’s selfish to want to take something from someone who earned it in order to by something for yourself. Neither is it charitable to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Dr A Burns
September 1, 2009 12:25 pm

Thank goodness the Chinese and Indian politicians have more sense than the US and Australian ones. If they had followed the nonsense there would be no hope for sanity.

Reed Coray
September 1, 2009 12:33 pm

Thank heavens Senator Box[of rocks]er is leading the Cap and Trade effort in the Senate. Her muddled leadership can’t help but kill the bill.
Reed Coray

Roger Knights
September 1, 2009 1:03 pm

“EPA to declare CO2 a dangerous pollutant, regulate ghg emissions”
If that occurs, it would take the heat off the Senate to pass Waxman-Markey, allow Obama a graceful way to back down on passing W-M, allow Obama to go to Copenhagen with something to show the US is taking action, and give more time before something irrevocable happens (because the EPA’s regulation would be tied up in the courts for years).

John Egan
September 1, 2009 1:07 pm

Wondering Aloud (10:38:08) :
Re: The Two Jameses – –
Think about it.

Stephen Brown
September 1, 2009 1:18 pm

J.Hansford (06:27:32) :
We all have the right to ‘bare arms’, but few retain the right to ‘bear arms’.
/pedanticism
We in the UK don’t even get to join in the discussion, never mind having something as powerful as a vote when it comes to ‘green’ issues. With effect from today it is illegal to offer for sale a 100W incandescent light bulb in England. On this point the government (lower case ‘g’ intentional) simply rolled over and blindly accepted an EU diktat. They have done exactly the same with our power supplies. We are to lose a good proportion of our coal fired power power stations. Why? Because the EU says that they are “too polluting”. The wind and the tides are expected to make up the shortfall in energy production. Unfortunately for this daydream, a government-produced document gives lie to the CO2-free Utopia.
“Over the next 10 years, one third of Britain’s power-generating capacity needs to be replaced with cleaner fuels. But last night the Conservatives said that Labour had refused to face up to the problem.
The admission that Britain will face power-cuts is contained in a document that accompanied the Government’s Low Carbon Transition Plan, which was launched in July.
Ed Miliband, the Energy and Climate Change Secretary, outlined the plan amid much fanfare.
Under the plan, 40 per cent of the UK’s electricity will need to come from low-carbon energy sources including clean coal, nuclear and renewables.
Accompanying the report is an appendix, only published online, which warns of power shortages. It details supplies and expected demand between now and 2030.
It highlights the first short-fall in 2017. The “energy unserved” level reaches 3000 megawatt hours per year.
That is the equivalent of the whole of the Nottingham area being without electricity for a day. ”
Whole dismal article here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/6118113/Britain-facing-blackouts-for-first-time-since-1970s.html
It is happening to us here in the UK, right now. Please don’t let it happen to you in the US. Please use your vote to end this chilling scenario.

tarpon
September 1, 2009 1:19 pm

Why should we screw up our economy, can’t we just look and see how this ‘tax and ration’ scheme has screwed up Europe’s?
I hear the IPCC is now declaring themselves a science entity, instead of just another bureaucracy. Is that a difference without a distinction these days?

Nogw
September 1, 2009 1:27 pm

Stephen Brown (13:18:05) : Don’t worry. Just tell the french to build several atomic power plants to sell you all the energy you need…A kind of inverted Waterloo!

Andrew Parker
September 1, 2009 1:31 pm

Nogw (11:25:31),
There were a number of Spanish communist academicians who were paid large consultant fees to help write Ecuador’s new Constitution. My assumption is that there is a broader effort at play.
Communism did not go away with the fall of the USSR, it only went into hiding in the universities, waiting to poison a new, ignorant generation. Socialism and Communism are compelling philosophies, especially among inexperienced, idealistic, impressionable youth (rebels without a clue).
I believe that the current push toward the Left in the U.S. has legs. The activists seem to be content with winning over a portion of the country, almost exclusively the urban centers, universities and patrician liberal suburbs. Rather than dominating all, they will simply isolate those populations and individuals that they cannot influence, using “righteous” force where necessary.
I have read leftist bloggers invoking the precedence of using the Armed Forces to enforce Civil Rights legislation and rulings to justify the future use of Obama’s proposed Civilian Defense Force to impose “Hope” and “Change” (meaning the people’s revolution). I don’t know as that is Obama’s idea, but it certainly is the idea of the core radicals.
Outside the context of the Latin American 21st Century Socialism, Obama’s presidency would seem relatively innocuous, but I am a bit nervous, given what I have seen happen to the South and what I have seen Obama and the Democrats do so far. … and yes, I do sometimes see black helicopters flying around, but they are with the local National Guard.
[Obligatory Cap and Trade content]
AGW and Cap and Trade are used as McGuffins by the politicians to justify bigger government. They are not about to just drop it simply because it they been scientifically disproven. It is not about science anymore, if it ever was.

Stephen Brown
September 1, 2009 1:34 pm

Of course, Draconian laws like the light-bulb ban require equally Draconian enforcement measures. It’s the Lumen Stasi!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6107069/Defra-considering-new-agency-to-police-lightbulbs.html

janama
September 1, 2009 2:06 pm

Jimmy Haigh – sorry you missed the sarcasm.

Aron
September 1, 2009 2:14 pm

“Nogw (11:29:07) :
Roger Sowell (10:53:58) :
IPCC= INTERNATIONAL PROGRESSIVE COMUNIST CONSPIRACY”
Wrong. Inner Party Central Commitee.

Aron
September 1, 2009 2:21 pm

I’m British, and I tell you if Sarah Palin was president right now, it would really be interesting. All this carbon craziness and big government mania would be evaporating by the day and the economy could get on with the job of building a better tomorrow the natural free spirited way. It’s a shame she isn’t. She could be for the US what Ronald Reagan and Thatcher were when they stood up against the Soviet machine.