After Campaigning For Climate Change Legislation, McCain Now Derides It As ‘Cap-And-Tax’
After Campaigning For Climate Change Legislation, McCain Now Derides It As ‘Cap-And-Tax’
On Friday, the House passed the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act which, among other things, would institute a cap-and-trade system to curb U.S. carbon emissions that contribute to man-made climate change. The Senate is set to consider the legislation in the fall, but a number of Republican senators have declared the legislation dead on arrival. In an interview this morning with conservative talker Mike Broomhead on Pheonix, AZ’s Newstalk 550 KFYI, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) echoed their sentiments. He smeared the ACES legislation as a “cap-and-tax” program motivated by the Obama administration’s desire to pay for things like “banks and the world’s largest insurance company”:
MCCAIN: In its present form, which is cap-and-tax. … It’s really terrible, because I believe that climate change is real, I believe it is something that we need to address, and I’m sure that a lot of Americans do, but to do so with a bill like this? … What [the Obama administration is] doing is using cap-and-trade…to raise billions of dollars so they can spend money on Cash for Clunkers, you know, buying General Motors and Banks and the world’s largest insurance company. … So it started on the wrong path and now it’s just turned into, you know, it’s laws and sausages at its worst in my view.
Asked whether he thought ACES would get through the Senate and the U.S. would “end up with cap-and-trade,” McCain lamented, “Look, elections have consequences.” McCain said further that Americans didn’t support ACES, calling it a “far-left” agenda item. Listen here:
While resistance to ACES among Senate Republicans isn’t surprising, McCain’s apparent disdain for the legislation certainly is. During the campaign, McCain laid out a plan to reduce U.S. carbon emissions that included a cap-and-trade component. Describing his plan in May 2008, McCain said, “A cap-and-trade policy will send a signal that will be heard and welcomed all across the American economy.” In June 2008, he said, “I have proposed a new system of cap-and-trade that over time will change the dynamic of our energy economy.” What was that McCain said about elections having consequences? It seems Congress would likely be considering a cap-and-trade system today even if McCain had won the election last fall.
More to the point, however, McCain’s principle substantive objection to early versions of ACES — that it would have auctioned 100 percent of the initial emission permits — has been addressed. The version that passed the House on Friday allows for 85 percent of the emission permits to be distributed free of charge for a “prolonged transition period.”
Finally, McCain is simply wrong to claim that the American people are not supportive of legislation like ACES. According to a Washington Post-ABC Poll, 75 percent of respondents said they supported government regulation of green house gas emissions, and 80 percent of those respondents said the government should do so even if it raised the cost of goods. As for their support for a cap-and-trade system, in particular, 52 percent of respondents favored it while just 42 percent said they opposed it.
- Comments
- 103
Boehner: American Clean Energy and Security Act is a ‘pile of sh*t.’
Boehner: American Clean Energy and Security Act is a ‘pile of sh*t.’
On Friday, the House passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act which will, in part, regulate carbon emissions in the U.S. House Minority Leader John Beohner, a vocal critic of the legislation, delayed Friday evening’s vote for nearly an hour by taking advantage his “privilege as leader to speak for an unlimited time on the House floor.” After the House finally voted on and passed the legislation, the Hill asked Boehner to comment on what he had hoped to gain through his “filibuster-like” delay. “Hey, people deserve to know what’s in this pile of sh*t,” Boehner replied.
Rep. Broun receives applause on the House floor for calling global warming a ‘hoax.’
Rep. Broun receives applause on the House floor for calling global warming a ‘hoax.’
During the floor debate this morning over the historic American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) received a round of applause from GOP colleagues when he claimed that man-made global warming is a “hoax” with “no scientific consensus.” Broun, citing misleading statistics, also claimed that the bill would hurt the poor and “kill jobs:”
BROUN: Scientists all over this world say that the idea of human induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community. It is a hoax. There is no scientific consensus. … And who’s going to be hurt most [by ACES] the poor, the people on limited income…the people who can least afford to have their energy taxes raised by MIT says $3100 per family. … This bill must be defeated. We need to be good stewards of our environment, but this is not it, it’s a hoax! … [APPLAUSE.]
Watch it:
Broun’s tired hoax claims aside, Broun’s $3,100 talking point is contradicted by the Congressional Budget Office, which found that that the average cost of the legislation would be only 48-cents a day, the price of a postage stamp, and that “households in the lowest income quintile would see an average net benefit of about $40 in 2020.” A report by the Center for American Progress and the University of Massachusetts also found that the bill would create 1.7 million new jobs, including 59,000 new jobs in Broun’s homestate of Georgia.
Gingrich-Run Coal Company Front Group Airing Anti-Climate Legislation TV Ads
Gingrich-Run Coal Company Front Group Airing Anti-Climate Legislation TV Ads
Newt Gingrich’s 527 organization, American Solutions for Winning the Future (ASWF), took to the airwaves yesterday in opposition to the Waxman-Markey clean energy reform bill. The 30-second attack ad falls highlights the Gingrich-inspired Republican strategy of calling the bill a “national energy tax”:
Now Congress is about to make things dramatically worse by passing a new national energy tax. We’ll lose more jobs, pay more for gas and electricity, pushing our economy to its breaking point. Stop the national energy tax, call your member of Congress before it’s too late.
Contradicting ASWF’s “energy tax” attack, a Congressional Budget Office analysis of Waxman-Markey found that the legislation only costs the equivalent of a postage stamp a day, while sharply cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Watch the ASWF ad:
An investigative piece by the Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson exposed Gingrich’s American Solutions as a front group for Peabody Energy, the world’s largest coal company. ASWF raked in over a quarter-million dollars in contributions in 2008 from the coal juggernaut, while receiving much of its remaining funding from a host of right-wing billionaires including casino kingpin Sheldon Adelson.
As climate change reform comes closer to a reality, expect to see more fear-mongering from these fossil-fueled front groups. Yesterday the GOP sent candles to lawmakers to “thank” Obama for “taxing our lights out.” Republicans called for the construction of 100 new nuclear power plants that same day. The fossil-fuel-dependent future promoted by Gingrich’s front group is catastrophic, as it “ignores the nightmarish damages that would be caused to our air, water and climate.”
GOP distributes candles to ‘thank’ Obama for ‘taxing our lights out.’
GOP distributes candles to ‘thank’ Obama for ‘taxing our lights out.’
The Republican National Committee has sent candles to lawmakers on Capitol Hill and released a web video claiming climate legislation will “tax our lights out.” Notes attached to the candles protest the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), claiming that the bill’s cap on global warming pollution will make it impossible for Americans to use electricity:
If Democrats pass ‘Cap and Tax,’ this is all the energy American families and businesses will be able to afford. Don’t tax our lights out!
Watch the video:
In reality, the Congressional Budget Office found last Friday “that the net annual economy-wide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion — or about $175 per household” — less than the cost of a postage stamp a day. The CBO analysis, done at the request of Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), found that the 23 million Americans “in the lowest income quintile — would see an average net benefit of about $40 in 2020.”
The point is that we need to be clear about who are the realists and who are the fantasists here. The realists are actually the climate activists, who understand that if you give people in a market economy the right incentives they will make big changes in their energy use and environmental impact. The fantasists are the burn-baby-burn crowd who hate the idea of using government for good, and therefore insist that doing the right thing is economically impossible.
Joe Barton: Democratic clean energy bill is ‘C.R.A.P.’
Joe Barton: Democratic clean energy bill is ‘C.R.A.P.’
Yesterday, House Republicans unveiled their alternative to the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), energy reform legislation that sets standards for renewable energy and global warming pollution. After Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) introduced the Republican “nuclear option,” they returned to attacking the Democratic plan as a “national energy tax.” Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), a prominent global warming denier and top recipient of dirty energy contributions, used potty humor in his attack:
They like to call it ACES but I call it C.R.A.P. — continue ruining America’s prosperity.
In fact, it is the lack of clean energy and global warming policies that has given this country record gas prices and devastating climate disasters. A clean energy economy can restore America’s prosperity. A new study from the Pew Charitable Trusts finds that “the number of jobs in America’s emerging clean energy economy grew nearly two and a half times faster than overall jobs between 1998 and 2007.”
House GOP energy plan declares that impact of global warming ‘shall not be considered for any purpose.’
House GOP energy plan declares that impact of global warming ‘shall not be considered for any purpose.’
House Republicans today introduced their alternative energy plan. Developed by the Republican American Energy Solutions Group, the American Energy Act is billed as an “all of the above” energy program. But as The Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson notes, the legislation looks more like an attempt to legislate the threat of global warming “out of existence.” Indeed, the bill specifically states that at no point in implementing their energy plan can the effects of global warming on the environment “be considered for any purpose”:
Johnson remarks, “The Republican response to our dependence on fossil fuels and their pollution is to give billions of dollars in new tax breaks and subsidies to the oil, coal, and nuclear industries.”
Franchise defends its ‘Global warming is baloney’ signs: Burger King is acting like ‘cockroaches.’
Franchise defends its ‘Global warming is baloney’ signs: Burger King is acting like ‘cockroaches.’
The Memphis Flyer recently caught multiple local Burger King restaurants sporting big “Global Warming is Baloney” signs. The Burger King corporation quickly distanced itself from the controversy: “The two restaurants where these signs appeared are independently owned and operated and were not authorized to display this statement. The signs have since been removed.” However, Leo Hickman of the Guardian reports that many of the signs are still up, and the corporation in charge of the franchises — a Memphis-based company called the Mirabile Investment Corporation — is defending its position:
Media attempts to contact MIC to establish why it was taking an apparently defiant stance were rebuffed, but the Guardian managed to grill MIC’s marketing president, John McNelis.
“I would think [Burger King] would run from any form of controversy kinda like cockroaches when the lights get turned on,” said Mr McNelis. “I’m not aware of any direction that they gave the franchisee and I don’t think they have the authority to do it.”
McNelis added: “The [restaurant] management team can put the message up there if they want to. It is private property and here in the US we do have some rights. … Burger King can bluster all they want about what they can tell the franchisee to do, but we have free-speech rights in this country so I don’t think there’s any concerns.”
Susan Robison, vice president of corporate communications for BKC, responded that “BKC has guidelines for signage used by franchisees [which] were not followed. We have asked the franchisee to remove the signage and have been told that the franchisee will comply.”
Inhofe’s Strategy To Block EPA Regulation Of Greenhouse Gases: ‘We Can Stall That Until We Get A New President’
Inhofe’s Strategy To Block EPA Regulation Of Greenhouse Gases: ‘We Can Stall That Until We Get A New President’
In April, the Environmental Protection Agency “formally declared carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping gases to be pollutants that endanger public health and welfare, setting in motion a process that will lead to the regulation of the gases for the first time in the United States.” Though President Obama has said that he would “prefer that Congress address global warming rather than have the EPA tackle it through administrative action,” the EPA’s finding allows the agency to move forward with regulations to limit greenhouse gas pollution to build a clean-energy economy.
Republicans and some centrist Democrats have attacked the EPA’s potential regulation of greenhouse gases. But the Senate’s top global warming denier does not not appear worried.
In a speech for the Heartland Institute yesterday, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said that the Senate could just “stall” any EPA regulation:
INHOFE: Don’t be distressed when you see the House passes some kind of cap-and-trade bill. And you know it could be worse and she could still pass it, so it’ll pass there. The EPA has threatened to regulate this through the Clean Air Act. That isn’t going to work in my opinion because we can stall that until we get a new president – that shouldn’t be a problem.
Watch it:
Make no mistake, Inhofe is an avowed opponent of EPA regulation. On the day that the EPA administrator Lisa Jackson announced the endangerment finding, Inhofe released a statement arguing that “Congress should pass a simple, narrowly-targeted bill that stops EPA in its tracks.”
Unsurprisingly, Inhofe is also against a cap-and-trade program, which he calls “another bad option.” In his Heartland Speech, Inhofe confidently predicted that he will be able to block any cap-and-trade legislation that passes the House, saying that “in the Senate it will not pass” thanks to obstructionists like him.
Transcript: More »
Rep. Akin Argues Against Curbing Emissions: I Don’t Want To Stop The Seasons From Changing
Rep. Akin Argues Against Curbing Emissions: I Don’t Want To Stop The Seasons From Changing
Yesterday on the House floor, Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) launched into a nonsensical tirade against legislation aimed at addressing global warming by reducing carbon emissions. Akin demonstrated his lack of understanding of climate issues by erroneously celebrating the seasonal change from winter to spring as “good climate change” and confused “weather” with “climate.” He dismissed the threat of global warming as a “comedy” and wondered who would “want to put politicians in charge of the weather anyways.”
Akin also twice implied that his fellow climate change-denying GOP congressmen are more knowledgeable than Democrats because they have “passed high school science”:
AKIN: This whole thing strikes me if it weren’t so serious as being a comedy you know. I mean, we just went from winter to spring. In Missouri when we go from winter to spring, that’s a good climate change. I don’t want to stop that climate change you know. Who in the world want to put politicians in charge of the weather anyways? What a dumb idea. [...]
Some of the models said that we’re going to have surf at the front steps of the Capitol pretty soon. I was really looking forward to that. [...]
We’ve been joined by another doctor, a medical doctor but also a guy who graduated from high school science as well, from Georgia, my good friend, Congressman Gingrey. … So to have actually a guy who’s passed high school science is tremendously helpful. And Dr. Fleming from Louisiana.
Watch it:
While Akin may be excited at the prospect of being able to “surf at the front steps of the Capitol,” the reality of climate change and the resulting increase in sea levels is far more serious. A study published by Science expects sea level rise of 0.8 to 2 meters (2.6 to 6.6 feet) by 2100; as Joe Romm writes, “Needless to say, a sea level rise of one meter by 2100 would be an unmitigated catastrophe for the planet, even if sea levels didn’t keep rising several inches a decade for centuries, which they inevitably would.”
In Akin’s own state of Missouri, climate change has already caused growing conditions to shift and several species of birds common to the state have migrated northward. If global warming persists, climatologists have predicted that Missouri can expect “warmer temperatures, shorter winters, and an overall increase in rain and flooding.” Indeed, unusually harsh storms and flooding caused a state of emergency in Missouri last month.
Burger King distances itself from franchise’s ‘Global Warming is Baloney’ signs.
Burger King distances itself from franchise’s ‘Global Warming is Baloney’ signs.
The Memphis Flyer recently caught multiple local Burger King franchises sporting a big “Global Warming is Baloney” sign. When reporter Chris Davis called one of restaurants to ask about the sign, employees initially denied that the sign was there. When they finally admitted that it was, they claimed that “Global Warming is Baloney” is the official opinion of the Burger King corporation:
BK: The sign was put up yesterday.
Me: And it’s not a mistake?
BK: No.
Me: It reflects the opinion of BK international?
BK: Yes. Would you like to talk to the home office? I can give you a number.
Me: I’ve got the number, I’ve already contacted them. Thanks.
On Friday, however, Susan Robison, Vice President of Corporate Communications for the Burger King Corporation, told the Flyer that the signs do not “reflect a Burger King Corp. (BKC) opinion or view. The two restaurants where these signs appeared are independently owned and operated and were not authorized to display this statement. The signs have since been removed.” (HT: AMERICAblog)
After Promising To Have Waxman ‘By The Nuts,’ Joe Barton Whines About Getting Beat ‘Time After Time’
After Promising To Have Waxman ‘By The Nuts,’ Joe Barton Whines About Getting Beat ‘Time After Time’
A week ago, Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX), the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, bet he would have committee chair Henry Waxman (D-CA) “by the nuts” during the markup of landmark climate and energy legislation by the committee:
He has got a chance to get the votes. If you are familiar with Texas Hold ‘Em poker, he doesn’t have the nuts. It is not a done deal. Nor do I. … We will see which has the other by the nuts next week.
“This is not going to be one of those gentlemanly, pro forma markups,” Barton swaggered, while circulating a list of hundreds of poison-pill amendments. “We’re prepared for it to take weeks or months.”
Instead, business and industry joined President Obama and environmentalists to support the bill, leaving Barton’s fellow global warming deniers to anonymously snipe at each other. Waxman didn’t blink at Barton’s bluster, even hiring a speedreader to negate Barton’s threat to delay the process by forcing the reading in full of the 937-page legislation and every amendment.
As Waxman steered the markup and Obama announced groundbreaking limits on global warming pollution from automobiles, Barton talked about the CO2 in Dr. Pepper. Republicans were left flailing, accusing Democrats of engineering economic catastrophe one moment and of being the party of big business the next. As his defeat became certain, Barton whined about being “beat time after time after time after time”:
It’s easy on the majority to keep up a good-faith attitude because you’re winning. . . . It’s not a lot of fun, as you well know, having been in the minority yourself for twelve years, to work very hard and put just as much effort and put just as much focus, and get beat time after time after time after time 36 to 22, 31 to 20, whatever it is.
Watch it:
The final vote in favor of the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454) was 35 to 23. Barton’s dirty-energy alternative failed 19 to 35, with two Republicans abstaining.
In the showdown between Waxman and Barton, it turned out to be the Texan who was all hat and no cattle.
Fissures Grow In Right-Wing Business Lobby As Caterpillar Speaks Out In Favor Of Clean Energy Legislation
Fissures Grow In Right-Wing Business Lobby As Caterpillar Speaks Out In Favor Of Clean Energy Legislation
Yesterday, President Obama sat down with members of his Economic Recovery Advisory Board to discuss the pending Waxman-Markey energy reform legislation. One of the advisers is James Owens, who is the CEO of Caterpillar and also a member of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the right-wing trade group that has taken a hard-line approach against any energy reform that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. When the President asked Owens if he saw a “competitive disadvantage” as a “big manufacturer” in dealing with energy reform, Owens said placing a cap on carbon would actually spur innovation:
OWENS: I agree with Jeff. I think we have the technology, we have the smarts here, and the product technologies, the economic incents of what’s needed. And that’s why I think of us in industry support a clarity around a carbon price, because that’s going to drive a lot of innovation and a lot of efficiency and will get with the program of reducing carbon emissions.
Owens continued laying out his support of clean energy legislation, noting most of Caterpillar’s renewable energy related products are currently sold “outside the United States…partly because of the way we regulate emissions site-specific, as opposed to looking at combined emissions and energy efficiency.” He also emphasized that giving the markets a price for carbon would “help our country be more competitive using the technologies that are out there.”
Owen’s increasingly outspoken tone comes at a time of tectonic shifts in the business community on clean energy. Currently, some of the most powerful traditional business trade groups — the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers — are devoting their efforts to “kill” clean energy reform legislation. But member corporations of these groups are at odds with this approach. The Natural Resources Defense Council conducted a study of the Chamber’s board members’ position on climate change legislation and found:
And out of the group of businesses that have publicly stated their positions, 19 favored federal action and only four opposed it. And three of those four are coal-mining companies.
Earlier this month, the utility company Duke Energy announced it would abandon its membership to the NAM over the trade group’s radical opposition to climate change legislation. When ThinkProgress asked NAM’s chief energy lobbyist about Duke Energy’s departure, NAM cowered and tried to hide its position. Similarly, member corporations such as Nike and Johnson and Johnson have applied pressure to the Chamber to drop its opposition to clean energy legislation.
With Caterpillar and other corporations calling for action on clean energy, the question becomes: will the NAM and other trade groups continue to lobby and fund ads opposing this legislation, or will member corporations find more relevant trade groups that will advance their interests in Washington?
Barton: We Shouldn’t Regulate CO2 Because ‘It’s In Your Coca-Cola’ And ‘You Can’t Regulate God’
Barton: We Shouldn’t Regulate CO2 Because ‘It’s In Your Coca-Cola’ And ‘You Can’t Regulate God’
Yesterday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee began its markup of the American Clean Energy and Security Act. The work is expected to continue through the week, as Republicans plan to stall movement on the bill by offering more than 400 amendments.
Discussing the bill on C-Span’s Washington Journal this morning, Rep. “Smokey Joe” Barton (R-TX) defended his head-in-the-sand approach to climate change by fundamentally misunderstanding the science, misstating the reality of carbon dioxide emissions, and mocking fuel-efficient cars. Some highlights:
– “I would also point out that CO2, carbon dioxide, is not a pollutant in any normal definition of the term. … I am creating it as I talk to you. It’s in your Coca-Cola, you’re Dr. Pepper, your Perrier water. It is necessary for human life. It is odorless, colorless, tasteless, does not cause cancer, does not cause asthma.”
– “And something that the Democrat sponsors do not point out, a lot of the CO2 that is created in the United States is naturally created. You can’t regulate God. Not even the Democratic majority in the US Congress can regulate God.”
– “If you think greenhouse gases are bad, life couldn’t exist without greenhouse gases. … So, there is a, there is a climate theory — and it’s a theory, it’s not a fact, it’s never been proven — that increasing concentrations of CO2 in the upper atmosphere somehow interact to trap more heat than the atmosphere would otherwise.”
— “You know, that life style is going to become more and more difficult if you get these vehicles smaller and smaller and less and less efficient in terms of being able to travel distances without having to recharge or refuel.”
Watch a compilation:
The idea that since CO2 is “natural” it cannot, by definition, be harmful is a popular one among the conservative climate-denying set — though totally irrelevant. Barton ignores the harmful effects of climate change itself, which will allow diseases to spread more easily, for example. Indeed, the Environmental Protection Agency found that climate change “is expected to worsen regional ozone pollution, with associated risks in respiratory infection, aggravation of asthma, and premature death.”
His complaint about smaller vehicles is also bizarre. He claims these cars will be “less and less efficient” because they will require more refueling stops. But the standards announced by President Obama today will create an average fuel economy rate of 35.5 miles per gallon — meaning cars can go farther between fueling, on less gasoline.
At one point during the C-Span segment, a caller told Barton he sounded like a spokesman for Big Oil. It’s no coincidence: Barton operates a “philanthropic” foundation that actually serves as a front group to funnel energy company funds.
House compromises on clean energy legislation may not ‘fully satisfy’ some Senate Democrats.
House compromises on clean energy legislation may not ‘fully satisfy’ some Senate Democrats.
Last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee struck a compromise on clean energy legislation that weakened areas of the bill in order to gain wider support. While the version of the bill being considered in the House is still worth supporting, Roll Call reports today that the compromises made in the House may not be enough for some Senate Democrats:
Another senior aide said Waxman’s “pragmatic approach … will be appreciated in the Senate” but cautioned that the deal is unlikely to fully satisfy Senate moderates who are looking to temper the bill even more.
“Rick Boucher does not equal Evan Bayh does not equal Debbie Stabenow,” the senior Senate Democratic aide said of the Democratic Senators from Indiana and Michigan, respectively. Bayh and Stabenow have expressed reservations about cap-and-trade provisions, which would cap emissions and allow industries to trade for pollution permits.
“There are a substantial number of moderate Democrats who are uneasy at best,” the knowledgeable Senate Democratic aide noted.
In his column today, Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman endorses the current House compromise, writing that “the legislation now on the table isn’t the bill we’d ideally want, but it’s the bill we can get — and it’s vastly better than no bill at all.” Climate Progress’s Joe Romm wrote yesterday that passing the House bill would be “a stunning legislative achievement” that would “require the United States to eliminate virtually all greenhouse gas emissions in four decades.”
Glenn Beck Exhales And States: ‘Look How Much Pollution I Just Put Out!’
Glenn Beck Exhales And States: ‘Look How Much Pollution I Just Put Out!’
On his Fox News show today, comedian Glenn Beck interviewed Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) to mock the danger of global warming. In what he billed as an “Inconvenient Segment,” Beck argued that a “smoking gun” memo proves that the proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finding on the threat of global warming pollution is based on politics instead of science.
“It turns out, the truth that’s inconvenient is that it’s not like any of this stuff is based on, you know, science. It’s all politics,” Beck said of the danger of carbon pollution. He concluded:
By the way, just so you know, this show has won so many science awards, sometimes we get talking about high-falutin science things like this, and people are like, “What are you talkin’ about?” So let me break it down. Carbon dioxide is basically this. (Exhales.) Look at how much pollution I just put out.
Watch it:
Unless you eat fossil fuels, spewing hot air from one’s mouth is not a major source for pollution…except for Glenn Beck.
Barrasso told Beck that the Obama administration is using the threat of EPA regulation of carbon dioxide “as a club to force cap-and-trade taxes,” but that he is using this memo to say, “Hey look, the science isn’t behind you.”
As Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director Peter Orszag explained, however, the White House agreed that the “proposed finding is carefully rooted in both law and science,” and the “OMB simply collated and collected disparate comments from various agencies during the inter-agency review process of the proposed finding.” The author of the skeptical comments forwarded by the OMB was Joseph M. Johnson, a Bush administration holdover in the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy. In 2005, Johnson joined the SBA from the Mercatus Center, an anti-regulatory think tank founded by right-wing pollution giant Koch Industries.
Analysis: Carbon cash to energy committee shapes climate debate.
Analysis: Carbon cash to energy committee shapes climate debate.
At a White House meeting last week, President Obama and Vice President Biden urged the Democrats on the House energy committee to take “quick action” on comprehensive green economy legislation. Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), a co-sponsor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act with Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), has explained that the legislation can’t move forward without the cooperation of fellow Democrats, many of whom are representing “the coal sector, with the steel, with the auto sector, with the refining sector.” A Wonk Room analysis has found that the average energy committee member opposed to, or wavering on, the green economy legislation has received six times as much lifetime climate polluter cash as the average supporter:
 |
| Carbon-sector contributions to members of the House Committee on Energy & Commerce. Click for more. |
“The obstructionist politicians working to weaken the ACES Act,” the Wonk Room’s Brad Johnson writes, “are ironically threatening the future of the industries who fill their campaign coffers. The nation needs to set strong standards for energy efficiency, renewable energy, and global warming pollution in order to compete in the 21st century economy.”
WHITEHOUSE: So if we wonder why the Senate is the last place in America that still doesn’t get it – that climate change is a real problem for people and that carbon pollution is something that people should pay for when they emit it, big utilities, big industry — gee, connect the dots.
Duke Energy Quits The Right-Wing National Association Of Manufacturers Over Differences On Climate Policy
Duke Energy Quits The Right-Wing National Association Of Manufacturers Over Differences On Climate Policy
The National Association of Manufacturers is a right-wing trade organization that refuses to address — or even acknowledge — man-made global warming. Last month, it protested the EPA’s decision to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, stating that the “clean air laws” are supposed to only focus on “local pollutants.” It has also funded climate change denier groups and heavily lobbied against any efforts to curb emissions.
The organization’s resistance to change is getting to be too much for its members. Today, Bloomberg reports that Duke Energy Corp., which owns utilities in the Southeast and Midwest, announced that it won’t be renewing its membership with NAM, in part because of NAM’s refusal to address global warming:
“We are not renewing our membership in the NAM because in tough times, we want to invest in associations that are pulling in the same direction we are,” Duke Chief Executive Officer Jim Rogers said last month in an interview. The association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Republicans “ought to roll up their sleeves and get to work on a climate bill, but quite frankly, I don’t see them changing.”
Charlotte, North Carolina-based Duke is a founding member of the United States Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of business and environmental groups that seeks to influence legislation on greenhouse gases linked to global warming. The National Association of Manufacturers has opposed mandatory controls, arguing they will harm the economy.
A Duke spokesman also said that the company would like to see cap-and-trade legislation “happen this year if possible.”
Duke isn’t the only corporation that is being frustrated that trade organizations — such as NAM and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — are refusing to address global warming. Some other examples:
– Thirty-two corporations — including Duke, Caterpillar, Xerox, News Corp, Dow Chemical, and PepsiCo — are members of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, which has called for a cap-and-trade system.
– Businesses such as Johnson & Johnson and Nike have asked the Chamber of Commerce to refrain from publicly opposing cap and trade legislation because the position doesn’t “reflect the full range of views, especially those of Chamber members advocating for congressional action.”
– Last year, a group of companies — including Starbucks, Nike and Sun Microsystems “banded together to urge Congress to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and promote investment in renewable energy.” The partnership, Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy, asked that “polluters be required to pay for the freedom to pollute and wants Congress to stimulate renewable energy development and ‘green’ job growth.”
In response to Duke’s newest announcement, NAM simply told Bloomberg that it has a “balanced policy on climate change.”
Global warming flood in Wasilla forces Palin to cancel correspondents dinner appearance.
Global warming flood in Wasilla forces Palin to cancel correspondents dinner appearance.
Because of a climate disaster, global warming skeptic Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) has been forced to cancel her attendance at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. The Wall Street Journal reports that an “unusually warm spring thaw in Alaska is causing some of the state’s worst flooding in decades, with rising rivers wiping out an entire village and bombarding another town with ice chunks as big as houses”:
Gov. Sarah Palin on Thursday was scheduled to fly over the stricken areas after canceling a planned trip to the East Coast for primarily state business. The governor on Wednesday had declared a disaster for the flooded areas, including the Susitna River, which runs through her hometown of Wasilla near Anchorage.
The floods resulted from “a rare combination of unusually heavy winter snow and a spring warm-up over the past week that saw temperatures soar into the 70s — a good 20 degrees higher than normal for this time of year.” Palin “had planned to attend the White House Correspondent’s Dinner this weekend in Washington, D.C., but a spokesman said her husband, Todd, would attend in her stead.”
Pence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution
Pence: I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution
Last month, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) announced the creation of the House GOP American Energy Solutions Group, which will “work on crafting Republican solutions to lower energy prices for American families and small businesses.” Undermining the seriousness of the task force, the GOP announced that it was appointing climate change denier Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to the group.
Another member of the organization is Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN). In a contentious debate with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews today, the third-ranking House Republican claimed that the science behind climate change is “mixed.” Pence did, however, admit that it is “fair” to question whether that makes him a discredited messenger on energy issues:
PENCE: Well let me tell you. I think the science is very mixed on the subject of global warming, Chris.
Q: Then why should your party believe you’re going to get serious about it, if you say the science is mixed?
PENCE: Yeah, it’s a fair question. But look. I’m all for clean air. I’m all for clean coal technology. I’m sure reducing CO2 emissions would be a positive thing.
“In the mainstream media, there is a denial of the growing skepticism in the scientific community on global warming,” Pence bellowed. Watch it:
It’s unclear what “growing skepticism” on man-made climate change Pence is seeing. But his anti-science tirade was just beginning. Pence then defended his party’s opposition to embryonic stem cell research, falsely claiming there were alternatives that “obviated” the need for embryonic research. And when Matthews pressed Pence on whether he believes in evolution — an undeniable fact and the foundation of biology — Pence said he believes in creationism:
PENCE: Uh, do I believe in evolution? I embrace the view that God created the Heavens and the Earth, the Seas and all that’s in them. The means that he used to do that, I can’t say, but I do believe in that fundamental truth.
“Did you take biology in school?” asked an incredulous Matthews. “If your party wants to be credible on science, you gotta accept science. … I don’t think your party is passionately committed to science, or fighting global warming, or dealing with the scientific facts we live with.”
“Tell me what you really think, Chris,” Pence retorted. “This anti-science thing is a little bit weak.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll