Boxer-Kerry: "climate" bill or green jobs program?

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.

https://i0.wp.com/farm4.static.flickr.com/3017/2549087853_62635f6261.jpg?resize=500%2C333

Photo by Chris Kleponis. NWF

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.

32 thoughts on “Boxer-Kerry: "climate" bill or green jobs program?

  1. As one law professor is wont to say, the country is in the very best of hands. And then he adds something about the rubes discovering who they are.

  2. The leftists are all about control and about association. That is why Graham is now on the side of the Alarmists.

  3. The lemmings seem so determined to have their day. In Australia likewise.
    Why do I get the feeling, though, that the “Great Orchestrators” will step back from the cliff at the last moment as the rest of us disappear over the edge.

  4. Cap&Trade is the objective, the climate and green jobs is the dressing.
    Stepping Stone to Copenhagen the true objective.
    Fortunately Kerry is promoting this bill and everybody knows he is an ass and Boxer is lying her pants off.

  5. Does anyone actually believe this garbage anymore?
    Ron de Haan (19:58:17) :
    “…Boxer is lying her pants off.”
    Scary!

  6. What is a “green job?”
    I heard about one green job plan here locally. It involved removing incandescent lights, and screwing in mercury light bulbs.

  7. Sen. Barbara Boxer has moved the energy and climate bill out of the Environment and Public Works Committee and onto the Senate floor
    Apparently by breaking Senate rules requiring minor members present for the vote.

  8. I have feeling that all the green jobs will go to SEIU/ACORN… Poor unions haven’t been paid off enough yet… How many millions did they donate to get the billions upon billions of bailouts?
    We wouldn’t buy enough Chrysler and GM products, so they figured ourt how to get our money anyway… Now the unions have large stakes in the corporations… Surprise surprise surprise… AIG absolutely HAD to be bailed out because they hold the retirement accounts of the senate and congress…
    Isn’t it grand???
    Change we can believe in…

  9. Hmmm … Green Jobs –
    Is this handing out ‘the green’, collecting the green, watering ‘the green’, MOWING ‘the green’, ROLLING ‘the green’ … ???
    This phrase has become so over-used/over-worn it means nothing to me at the present …

  10. To my self-esteemed Senator Barbara Boxer:
    This news flash is for you….
    “Saturday, June 4, 1884. Trinity Journal
    Weather – Never was there so many showers known in this portion of California as there have been in the present Spring. During the past week we have had a shower every evening.
    Old Settlers here inquire: “Is our climage changing?”
    It appears so.
    June 14, 1884
    Rained every day this week.
    June 20, 1884
    Wednesday had 1″ of ice in pails.
    It would be 70 years until the perfect weather of the mid 1800’s would return to California. Too bad it’s lost on the Senator.

  11. Zeke the Sneak (20:24:48) :
    And don’t forget where that CFL comes from, and who was responsible for seeing to it that GE, Sylvania and Westinghouse walked across the Pacific to China.
    It ain’t Mr. Greenjeans.
    Nope. It’s the 1st name in the topic header.

  12. rbateman (20:59:35) :
    And don’t forget where that CFL comes from, and who was responsible for seeing to it that GE, Sylvania and Westinghouse walked across the Pacific to China.

    green job — digging holes (for the burial of the economy)
    Sad!

  13. If they are determined to get us off foreign energy dependence, then why did the President kill the nuclear power option?
    The admin pulled the plug on Yucca Mountain without an alternative for waste disposal.
    Now the plants in operation won’t be able to renew their liscenses unless they have sufficient onsite storage, of which some are running out.

  14. Here is a decent political analysis:
    http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091105/congressional-rules-take-leading-role-us-climate-progress
    The main point is that Harry Reid actually agrees with the Republicans, or feels it is in his best interest to do so at this point at least: the bill will be further delayed by 5 weeks to have the EPA analysis completed (don’t be surprised if it’s as flawed as the EPA’s analysis of Waxman-Markey, which through various dubious methods determined that the cost to American families would be the same as “a postage stamp per day.”
    Note that in committee Max Baucus (Montana) voted against the bill out of concern with the effect on farming (and inability to offer his amendments due to Boxer’s rules maneuver). Jay Rockefeller (West Virginia) is on record against the current bill (and also comments that it may not be taken up until after the 2010 elections). These are not even among the most centrist Democrats in the Senate.
    Even with whatever mischief Lindsey Graham is up to, there are just not votes there for this bill without major changes (at least, maybe not even then), and Harry Reid knows it…which is why the bill will not be brought up this year, IMO. And Graham, after hearing from his constituents and considering Boxer’s hyperpartisan methods, has a good chance of reconsidering as well.

  15. This CO2 Cap and Tax bill must be defeated. It is welfare for Wall Street. It will not make us less dependent on foreign energy. It will make us dependent on foreign Carbon Credits. How stupid is that?

  16. “We should never be more vigilant than at the moment a new dogma is being installed. The claque endorsing what is now dignified as “the mainstream theory” of global warming stretches all the way from radical greens through Al Gore to George W. Bush, who signed on at the end of May. The left has been swept along, entranced by the allure of weather as revolutionary agent, naïvely conceiving of global warming as a crisis that will force radical social changes on capitalism.”
    -ALEXANDER COCKBURN, TheNation
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070625/cockburn

  17. A few weeks ago one of my Senators, Kirsten Gillebrand, had a WSJ editorial pointing out how prepared New York is for cap-and-trade. We already have Wall Street with all their experience in trading futures. She waxed rhapsodic about the boon this would be for Wall Street and all of New York.
    An endless supply of government money and Wall Street traders, what could go wrong?

  18. Take a look at the weather in CA during the winter of 1862-1863, I believe it was. It rained without letup from nothern border to southern border for 30 days and 30 nights. Something like 75% of the man made structures in the state got washed away. In Sacramento, all that could be seen (from a boat, of course) were the tops of the telegraph poles sticking out of the water. The San Joaquin Valley became a lake some 280 miles by 80 miles, traversible by boat. Half of the city of San Diego was washed out to the ocean, as were at least a half a million head of cattle. All rivers in SoCal changed their courses.
    Now the eco-whackos want to return the Los Angeles River to its natural (unpaved) state. My background in hydraulic engineering tells me that it would then have only about half of the capacity to carry the runoff it now carries to prevent flooding of homes and businesses.
    What a way to substantially reduce the problem of illegal aliens in the US. By all means, return the Los Angeles River to its natural state.

  19. If an equivalent set of storms happened now, even with all of the flood control facilities that have been constructed since then, millions of people in California would simply drown. Millions.
    Of course. were the New Madrid earthquakes circa 1812-1813 were to recur (as they will), the devastation in the Mississippi Valley would be enormous. Once again, millions of Americans would die quickly.
    Oh, but we must spend all of our treasure to prevent . . . to prevent . . . Would someone at least wipe the sweat from the warmmongers’ brows? . . . they are getting feverish indeed. And want to pass their illness on to the rest of us.

Comments are closed.