It seems difficult to figure out just what the Boxer-Kerry bill is these days. If nothing else, its a sloppy rush job, beyond that, is it climate, or something else? How much will it cost? Only the shadow knows.
From Wall Street Journal Blogs Environmental Capital:
By Keith Johnson
Okay, so Sen. Barbara Boxer has moved the energy and climate bill out of the Environment and Public Works Committee and onto the Senate floor. That doesn’t get the bill any closer to garnering 60 votes, but as Sen. Boxer said, it can’t get 60 votes while stuck in committee, either.
The chairwoman of the environment committee defended her decision to pass the bill despite a Republican boycott; usually, Senate panels require at least a token presence of the minority party. Rules do allow for a simple majority vote, rules that “are there to be used when the Majority feels it is in the best interest of their states and of the nation to act,” Sen. Boxer said.
The GOP wants to see more economic analysis of the impacts of the bill, which would create a cap-and-trade program, but Sen. Boxer said another report by the Environmental Protection Agency would be “duplicative and a waste of taxpayer dollars.” The EPA did sort of analyze the current Kerry-Boxer bill, but it largely cribbed from an earlier analysis of a similar House bill.
One interesting thing: Climate change and global warming does seem to be slipping down the list of Democratic talking points. Sen. Boxer said the bill “addresses a crucial issue of our time.”
What would that be? Turns out there’s several—but saving the planet from climate catastrophe isn’t one of them. The bill will “move us away from foreign oil imports that cost Americans one billion dollars a day, it will protect our children from pollution, create millions of clean energy jobs, and stimulate billions of dollars of private investment,” Sen. Boxer said.