Joe Lieberman: US senate still short votes needed to pass "climate" bill

File:Joe Lieberman official portrait.jpg

From CNN and Wire reports

Senator Joe Lieberman, was on CNN Sunday and said about 50 senators support the Kerry sponsored “climate” bill. However, 30 others remain opposed.

Estimates are that approximately 20 senators remain undecided. Time to call your senators and explain to them why this bill is bad for America

AP reports that:

A major sticking point has been the bill’s approach to carbon emissions, which are blamed for global warming. Mr. Lieberman said capping carbon pollution and putting a price on it is at the heart of the bill. Republicans reject the idea of a carbon tax.

Apparently he’s scheduled in a meeting with Obama on Wednesday to discuss the issue.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

53 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gary
June 21, 2010 6:02 am

I never bother calling my idiot senators because they invariably pick the wrong side of the issue and then thank me for my input which will be ignored completely.
Lieberman better be a golfer to get that meeting, the golf course is where you find the President these days.

wws
June 21, 2010 6:13 am

Just encourage them to stay undecided and refuse to hold a vote – August 9 is when Congress goes on recess and starts electioneering seriously. That’s just 6 weeks away, and there are a lot of other things for them to do between now and them.
Kill the clock any way possible, and we can win this round.

Curiousgeorge
June 21, 2010 6:19 am

Powerful people do not give up power easily. As has been said: “True power is never given, it is always taken.” The only way to stop the climate tax business, in all its guises, is to remove those whose power depends on it becoming a reality. That includes not only the politicians, but those who support them. Corporate Boards need to hear from their major shareholders and the general public, and redirect their lobbyists efforts. Wall street must be given a message that investing in the future of carbon trading is a sure loser.

Doug in Seattle
June 21, 2010 6:32 am

The best way to fight this bill is to remind your Senator that Cap’n Trade was invented 10 years ago by Enron and BP, with emphasis on BP’s role.
Telling them about the fake consensus, or the ginned up “science”, or even the economic stupidity of it is a waste on most current supporters, but BP is really toxic now (and for the foreseeable future).

June 21, 2010 6:37 am

The cap-and-trade bill is not about “cutting greenhouse gas emissions.” It’s about taxation and people control. Morever, the AGW theory has been thoroughly discredited. Not only is there no measurable warming from CO2; there is no such thing as an atmospheric “greenhouse effect.” It’s a physical impossibility.
See “Rescue from the Climate Saviors”:
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/06/rescue-from-climate-saviors.html
Also see this paper by Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0707/0707.1161v4.pdf

Henry Galt
June 21, 2010 6:54 am

The same guy has a 25% approval rating and wants the government to totally own the Internet – unrelated?

jaypan
June 21, 2010 7:18 am

Very interesting to watch how left and green ideas, together with greed, political stupidity and corrupted science are set up to destroy the economic power of the West within a very short period of time, historically speaking.
No doubt, there will be a number of countries cheering about it. But not your friends.

Hu McCulloch
June 21, 2010 7:30 am

Kirk Myers says:
June 21, 2010 at 6:37 am
…. Morever, the AGW theory has been thoroughly discredited. Not only is there no measurable warming from CO2; there is no such thing as an atmospheric “greenhouse effect.” It’s a physical impossibility.

CAGW skeptic scientists like Fred Singer, Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer, etc, are the first to affirm the existence of a GHG effect, and that some of it is anthropogenic. What they doubt is that the human component is big enough in comparison to natural factors to get excited about — the “Catastrophic” part of CAGW.
I trust Anthony would agree.

Leon Brozyna
June 21, 2010 7:40 am

It’s not just votes that the Senate is short of …

Curiousgeorge
June 21, 2010 7:40 am

Possibly related: China is set to surpass the USA in manufacturing output next year. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/af2219cc-7c86-11df-8b74-00144feabdc0.html . A contributing factor might be their build out of those nasty old coal plants, while selling us crap (wind turbines, etc. ) that does nothing for our manufacturing capability. Ya think?

Steve Oregon
June 21, 2010 7:45 am

This is great. It appears the vote on this climate bill will get pushed off to November for a different kind of a vote.
It’s called the general election.
That’s when climate bill supporters will get the vote they fear the most.
The one which shows them the door.

June 21, 2010 7:51 am

If you think like I do on Lieberman Kerry or not contact your congressman.
[If you don’t then just go back to sleep.]
Taxing CO2 is a job killing action which is enormously expansive and not necessary.
Here is how to find and e-mail them:
House of Representatives.
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
Senators
http://senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?Name=Cornyn&nState=TX

Allencic
June 21, 2010 8:18 am

I’m just so fed up with Congressmen who seem to be scientific morons. Can’t we give the a simple science exam before they’re sworn in? The President too. Seriously, they seem to have zero understanding of basic scientific principles and yet they are willing and eager to spend billions of our money without any understanding of the science behind the bills.

Henry chance
June 21, 2010 8:22 am

It is not a “climate” bill. The climate is not controlled by some little people expressing a vote and fleecing the flock.

June 21, 2010 8:34 am

Not enough votes? Too bad, so sad. Thanks for playing, Liebs! kthxbye.

Chuck L
June 21, 2010 8:37 am

I live in NJ and both of my senators have drunk the AGW kool-aide. I have called them, faxed them and e-mailed them with absolutely no effect and unfortunately, neither are up for election. I hope those of you in other states have better luck.

June 21, 2010 8:47 am

It is always a matter of a clever choice: To be or not to be, to be remembered or to be forgotten for ever.
♫♫♫♫
For what is a man, what has he got?
If not himself, then he has naught.
To say the things he truly feels;
And not the words of one who kneels.
The record shows I took the blows –
And did it my way!
…. ♫♫♫♫

June 21, 2010 8:50 am

Well, one of my Senators is John Faux Kerry. ‘Nuff said.
However, I’m happy to report that the other is now Scott Brown. And he’s not going to vote for Crap and Tax.
There’s hope for Massachusetts yet!
/Mr Lynn

Charles Higley
June 21, 2010 8:50 am

Hu McCulloch:
“CAGW skeptic scientists like Fred Singer, Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer, etc, are the first to affirm the existence of a GHG effect, and that some of it is anthropogenic. ”
That’s not quite correct as our atmosphere is not a greenhouse. There is no ceiling which prevents convection of heat away from the surface. Thus, no greenhouse. These gases are best described as “heat-trapping” gases, but CO2 is a poor one as it only absorbs in two narrow ranges and one of these overlaps/conflicts with water vapor. It is only the bad science of assuming that water vapor is a strong positive feedback factor that allows the AGW junk science construct to pretend that CO2 can cause warming. In a real greenhouse, water vapor may actually be a positive forcing factor but, as water vapor is part of a huge global heat engine called the water cycle (middle school science), it is in fact a strong negative feedback factor.
The recent work by Miskolczi and Zagoni not only show that these two gases essentially exert a constant effect, one displacing the other, but, as CO2 is a weaker heat-trapping gas than water vapor, displacing water vapor by rising CO2 may actually cause a slight cooling of the climate.
The amount of heat-trapping by CO2 is still open to debate, but it is, in all real science discussions, small and inconsequential to climate or man, and certainly not something to do anything about. We should let technology and efficiency do its own thing and our energy sources will evolve logically to a useful mixture without government interference, which will only hinder development anyhow, as it always does.
Also, Venus’s atmosphere at 90+ atm pressure, 98% CO2, and 500 deg C is not a greenhouse either. A greenhouse is based on radiation reaching the surface and being reradiated as infrared. On Venus, solar radiation does not reach the surface, being blocked by the upper level permanent cloud deck. The high temperatures of Venus can be easily explained by the high atmospheric pressure. Not a greenhouse.

Vinny
June 21, 2010 9:05 am

Joe Lieberman is as independent as I am a liberal. The only reason he became an independent was because the Democrats threw him under the bus. A Lib is a Lib is a Lib. You can’t trust them.

James Sexton
June 21, 2010 9:12 am

No way should we look across the ocean and see how well it has worked out for the EU.
Even with the BP oil disaster, there is no stomach for a fight like the one that would be generated if it was to be taken for a vote. The mood of the electorate is a little angry right now. The senators know they can’t bring it to a vote right before the election.

Garry
June 21, 2010 9:16 am

The most odious and repellent part of the “climate change” debate is dealing with politicians. Yeah, intermingling with “advocates” and “journalists” and “climate scientists” is objectionable.
But politicians are absolutely the worst.

James Sexton
June 21, 2010 9:26 am

Curiousgeorge says:
June 21, 2010 at 7:40 am
“Possibly related: China is set to surpass the USA in manufacturing output next year.”
From the article you referenced. “……… but is poised to relinquish this slot in 2011 to China – thus ending a 110-year run as the number one country in factory production.”
Sigh. its as if we don’t even want to be the top producer anymore. And the same pinheads that allowed this and the throttle on American production will wonder where all the jobs are.

DirkH
June 21, 2010 9:26 am

” Hu McCulloch says:
June 21, 2010 at 7:30 am
Kirk Myers says:
June 21, 2010 at 6:37 am
…. Morever, the AGW theory has been thoroughly discredited. Not only is there no measurable warming from CO2; there is no such thing as an atmospheric “greenhouse effect.” It’s a physical impossibility.
CAGW skeptic scientists like Fred Singer, Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer, etc, are the first to affirm the existence of a GHG effect, and that some of it is anthropogenic.

I would like to point out that Lindzen argues at least in part along the same lines as the (very good IMHO) paper Kirk linked to, see
http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lindzen/cooglobwrm.pdf
“for example, at altitudes between 25 and 90 km, the atmosphere is cooled primarily by thermal radiation emitted to space by CO2.”.

Alexander K
June 21, 2010 9:41 am

Everywhere in the Westminster parliamentary system, the politicians in power tend to no longer ask their electors what should they do, they make up policy after they are elected and only take advice from their pet advisers. The English, Australian and New Zealand Prime Ministers all share the same bucket of Kool-ade, although it seems the Australian has had to put his ETS scheme on hold. John Key, NZ PM has pushed his ETS through parliament into law and already consumers’ energy costs have risen sharply. The English Climate Change minister has upbraided the Europeans for not setting thier emission-reduction targets high enough and seems hell-bent on covering the UK with the ridiculous fans-on-a-pole and destroying the UK landscape along with the country’s economy. Hopefully, the dire state of the world economy will prevent these lunatics doing too much damage until general realisation that ‘warm is good’ sinks in.
What happened to the ideal of ‘servants of the people’?

1 2 3