Will Conservative Democrats Follow Graham’s Lead On Climate Policy?
Will Conservative Democrats Follow Graham’s Lead On Climate Policy?
Extensive coverage has been devoted to the fact that Lindsey Graham’s split on global warming and other issues highlights a rift in the Republican Party. While that’s true, another more important development has not been pursued: Graham’s departure from right-wing orthodoxy highlights the potential for conservative Democrats to follow in his footsteps.
Many conservative Democrats have questioned President Obama’s clean energy agenda. Now, a Republican is breaking with his party to talk sense. In a press conference yesterday with Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), the author of the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Graham rebuked senators unwilling to address carbon pollution. Saying that he has “seen the effects of a warming planet,” Graham called for the United States to “lead the world rather than follow the world on carbon pollution”:
The green economy is coming. We can either follow or lead. And those countries who follow will pay a price. Those nations who lead in creating the new green economy for the world will make money.
Watch it:
Graham sounded more like Van Jones — the author of “The Green Collar Economy” who was branded by Glenn Beck as a “communist” — than many of his Democratic colleagues:
Max Baucus (D-MT): Montana, with our resource-based agriculture and tourism economies, cannot afford the unmitigated impacts of climate change. But we also cannot afford the unmitigated effects of climate change legislation.
Evan Bayh (D-IN): Jobs should be our top priority and we shouldn’t do anything that detracts from that.
Robert Byrd (D-WV): I will actively oppose any bill that would harm the workers, families, industries, or our resource-based economy in West Virginia.
Byron Dorgan (D-ND): I just don’t think climate change is going to be on the floor this year. Trying to restart our economic engine and trying to get this country back to work — to me that is the most important issue.
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR): I am opposed to the House passed cap-and-trade legislation, which in my view, picks winners and losers and places a disproportionate share of the economic burden on families and businesses in Arkansas.
Claire McCaskill (D-MO): I hope we can fix cap and trade so it doesn’t unfairly punish businesses and families in coal dependent states like Missouri.
Ben Nelson (D-NE): I think at the end of the day, the people who turn the switch on at home are going to be disadvantaged.
Jim Webb (D-VA): We can’t just start with things like emission standards at a time when we’re at a crisis with the entire national energy policy.
Do these Democrats agree with Lindsey Graham that our planet “is in peril“? Do they agree with Graham that “limiting carbon pollution is good for business”? Will conservative Democrats follow Sen. Graham’s embrace of the “new green economy” — and shouldn’t they be asked if they will?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Consevative ‘Democrats’ suck. THEY are the ones holding up legislation, THEY are the ones watering down everything. THEY are only worried about their seats and not their constituents. Bayh is married to a Health Care lobbyist , so is LIEberman. As for Blanche Lincoln and Bill Nelson? I hope they lose their primaries. Good riddance.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:50 amI hear Big Coal change shaking in these people’s pockets.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:53 amWill Conservative Democrats Follow Graham’s Lead On Climate Policy?
– - Do Boehner and Beck cry at the mention of mom and apple pie?
November 5th, 2009 at 10:54 amRight now the winners are China, Germany and Spain in the rush to capture the Green Money. Solar Energy conference last week in Anaheim had 23,000 attendees and over 400 displays. Over 20% of the attendees were Chinese.
While the Repugs and consevative Democrats piss and moan and wring their hands, the world moves forward. It’s the right thing to do and it’s the smart thing to do.
Inhoffe is allergic to smart though, I think the word is logophobic.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:57 amI’d like to say that on something so fundamentally crucial as taking every step possible to avoid a climate change catastrophe, I’m amazed that politics and patronage have any say whatsoever on legislations.
But, I know how terribly small the moral compasses of some of our leadership is….
November 5th, 2009 at 11:00 ami hear or read that a big wind farm is going up in texas and all the wind turbines and support stuff is coming from china, theres some good old country first texas style.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:03 amDamn. I can’t get over Graham. He was the only Repug who was about to clap at Obama’s address. He stood up to ‘Tea-Baggers’ in his state. And now he’s is HELPING the Dems? If only I could erase what a dirt-bag he was for years. I might actually like him.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:04 amWhether they believe in global warming or not they should be in favor of:
1) Reducing our money going to terrorist oil in the Middle East.
2) Creating jobs in the USA.
3) Discovering new technologies and owning the patents in the USA.
4) Cleaner air to breath.
5) Reduce pollution on the ground and in the water.
Along with other benefits.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:06 amGetting the support of these Senators will depend on how the bill is crafted. If it’s focused mas much on creating green jobs and promoting a renewable energy infrastructure powered by the labor of the people current toiling in mines, it’s a win-win.
Likely, most of the above Sens DO support efforts to halt global wamring…but still need to support their constituents.
These aren’t the Flat Earthers you find in the GOP
November 5th, 2009 at 11:06 amso brad, were you happy – or not – with jon stewart’s interview
with al gore last night?
i’m still not used to the time change and it’s hard to stay awake at that time, but i do remember that the interview did
nothing to change that… ho hum…
but rachel’s interview with him was good… AND she even threw in
November 5th, 2009 at 11:06 ama quote from my idjit rep. shitkus about his biblical interpretation
of the subject (i admit i forget which quote)…
Off Topic.. But does anyone know how many wing-nuts are supposed to show up at crazy Michelle’s ‘Tea-Bagger’ Party? I’m really curious.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:06 amP.D. says:
Off Topic.. But does anyone know how many wing-nuts are supposed to show up at crazy Michelle’s ‘Tea-Bagger’ Party? I’m really curious.
Thousands. How many will actually show? I’m guessing SamJoe and 10 Palinites.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:10 amI think it’s supposed to be a couple dozen, but will be reported by Faux News as 1.7 million.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:11 amPilotshark says: i hear or read that a big wind farm is going up in texas and all the wind turbines and support stuff is coming from china, theres some good old country first texas style.
Al Gore mentioned that on either Maddow or The Daily show. But you know what Al gore is like, always inventing things like a series of tubes and such! :D
November 5th, 2009 at 11:11 amAren’t the repiggies supposed to be the party of business and investment?
What the hell has happened to the repiggies?
Energy conservation and alternative fuel sources are already being researched and funded all over the world.
In the meantime, the repiggies are stuck in the 1950’s energy-wise, and they base their “science” on a tortured misreading of Genesis.
Are there any intelligent repiggies left, even selfish ones who are smart enough to capitalize on the coming wave of interest?
Aren’t there any intelligent repiggies who want to own the patents for these new technologies, or are they willing to cede all that to smart people outside this nation?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:12 amLOL! Good ole Michelle is losing it. Just the other day her top advisor resigned. I guess even the most die-hard Repug supporter has their limits. I suprised her staff isn’t ready to be institutionlized.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:14 amThe conserva-dems will believe what their Masters, the lobbyists’, tell them. Our changeling president needs to kick some congressional butt. It’s ironic, considering all the power the Executive Branch has assumed, that they won’t use it “for good”.
Thank goodness there is no “ring”.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:24 amMeanwhile, back at the ranch…
Carrie Prejean, little Miss Defender of Traditional Marriage and Holy Rollerism herself, has been making out in a graphic sex tape, according to this link.
http://rawstory.com/2009/11/sex-tape-prejean/
Does Jesus want his surgically enhanced bosom beauty playing with her hoo-hoo for all the world to see?
Gracious me!
November 5th, 2009 at 11:27 amMax Baucus (D-MT): But we also cannot afford the unmitigated effects of climate change legislation.
Because Baucus is agin’ things that don’t yet exist but assumes must be bad, real bad.
Evan Bayh (D-IN): Jobs should be our top priority and we shouldn’t do anything that detracts from that.
Like creating jobs from a new technology driven industry? We must bail-out the buggy whip manufacturers to save our econmy!
Robert Byrd (D-WV): I will actively oppose any bill that would harm the workers, families, industries, or our resource-based economy in West Virginia.
Screw all those non-resource-based economies in other states!
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR): I am opposed to the House passed cap-and-trade legislation, which in my view, picks winners and losers and places a disproportionate share of the economic burden on families and businesses in Arkansas.
…and….
Claire McCaskill (D-MO): I hope we can fix cap and trade so it doesn’t unfairly punish businesses and families in coal dependent states like Missouri.
Mrreeow! Catfight! Whose state is going to be more burdened? Arkansas or Missouri?!
Ben Nelson (D-NE): I think at the end of the day, the people who turn the switch on at home are going to be disadvantaged.
Because there won’t be any electricity?
Jim Webb (D-VA): We can’t just start with things like emission standards at a time when we’re at a crisis with the entire national energy policy.
Even though you just passed a bill raising emission standards for cars?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:28 amevan@18, I bet they won’t be showing THAT on Faux news.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:30 amP.D., you know and I know that It’s hard-ons for Jesus time right now at CroxNews, where all those obese old slobs are lathering themselves up just thinking about the sex tape of their blonde goddess.
Who know?
Perhaps the tape will be good audition material for a news-reading gig at CroxNews.
She has the “look.”
November 5th, 2009 at 11:34 amEvan@21, True.. But eewww…
November 5th, 2009 at 11:37 amGraham’s running for President?
November 5th, 2009 at 11:44 amImportant changes like halting global warming, publicly run insurance, school improvement and more have always happened, or been forced to happen by The People demanding it. Waiting and hoping for a politician or businessman to “do the right thing” is not what works.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:44 amPolitics and fossil-fuel funding are going to keep elected officials from states with coal-oriented economies from ever signing on to cap and trade or any legitimate climate legislation, and they will never support such legislation on the floor of congress.
The question is whether these particular democratic senators would filibuster to keep this legislation from passing.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:55 amFrom Brad’s post;
“Do these Democrats agree with Lindsey Graham that our planet “is in peril“? Do they agree with Graham that “limiting carbon pollution is good for business”? Will conservative Democrats follow Sen. Graham’s embrace of the “new green economy” — and shouldn’t they be asked if they will?”
From their comments, it certainly appears that several of them think our economic and energy issues trump the climate issue. That’s short-sighted and parochial; after all, if the climate changes too much, our economic and energy issues may be fracking irrelevant.
Can they be convinced that limiting carbon pollution is good for business? If we aren’t players in that, and if we don’t have a strong presence in developing the technological and methodolobical processes for controlling carbon dioxide emissions and sequestering carbon, we’re going to be second or third rate; we’ll be buying it from the Chinese and Indians instead of selling it to them.
Of course they ought to be asked if they’ll get on board, if they’ll get with the program. That question ought to be put to every fracking Republipimp denier too.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:12 pm@ 26. that should be methodological, not methodolobical
November 5th, 2009 at 12:14 pmBlue dogs think that change will come for free and it will have a magic solution. In their world wave a wand instant healthcare and climate control. One thing they don’t count on is consequences for them.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:07 pmWhy are the rabid right-wingers called “conservatives?” Why are they actually conserving? Our environment? No. Rabid right-wingers are more properly called radical destrsuctions. Some of the teabaggers seem to be anarchists, although they do not go as far as the 19th century Russian anarchist, who said, “property is theft.”
November 5th, 2009 at 2:01 pmThe conservaDems and Graham are not disputing the climate change. However, they are looking at the impact of the bill as it affects their districts or state. These representatives are trying to secure a part of the bill so that any jobs lost in their district will be replaced by new jobs. It would certainly be helpful if the climate change bill address the concerns of many representatives in areas that are coal states. Their concern is legitimate and I would suspect that in order for the bill to pass, the new jobs will be created in those areas hardest hit by cap and trade. This is not a situation where the representatives are going to vote against the bill regardless of its provisions.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:13 pmOval12345678
You’re right, right wingers are in fact anarchists, while neoconservatives, progressives (aka neoliberals) are left wingers or totalitarians. Classical conservative and liberal ideas are the foundation of a Constitutional Republic and Freedom. The Republican and Democratic Parties (most elected officials) are a far cry from what the good people (voters) in both of these parties actually believe they stand for.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:30 pmClimate change has never been disputed. It is a constant cycle. We have had warm periods before; far warmer than what we are experiencing now and before any industrial carbon producing processes existed. Now that we are experiencing a cooling trend for the past 2 years, I can’t wait to see the spin that the United Nations, big Oil, General Electric, Al Gore’s corporate affilitions, etc. will put on this.
More than 50% of the peer reviewed white papers written by Climatologists, Physicists concerning this subject are not alarmist in nature. There’s certainly no consensus.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pmWhy do conservative christians lie so much?
November 5th, 2009 at 7:58 pmWill Conservative Democrats Follow Graham’s Lead On Climate Policy?
They will, or they’ll go the way of the incumbents in this week’s elections.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:46 pmConservativeChristian says:
There’s certainly no consensus.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Um, yes there is. Just because you don’t (or won’t) try to understand scientific studies, doesn’t mean that you’re speaking the truth.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:47 pm