• Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) took to twitter shortly after Obama’s interviews to offer not only his support for same-sex marriage, but for the Respect for Marriage Act, which would repeal the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act.
• Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) released an extremely supportive statement, calling it “no business of mine if two men or two women want to get married” and “absurd” that such marriages would have any impact on his life. He later added that he would support legalizing same-sex marriage in Nevada.
• Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) joined the chorus on Thursday, saying that extending marriage equality “is the right thing to do and will not, in any way, undermine the institution of marriage.”
• Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-NE), who is running for re-election after an 11-year hiatus, voiced his support for marriage equality, calling for “increased awareness of the struggle of gay and lesbian Americans.”
• Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn (D) came out for marriage equality on Friday, and this week committed to working with state lawmakers to make it a reality in the state.
• House Assistant Minority Leader James Clyburn (D-SC) added his support for same-sex marriage as a civil right, which he believes should be supported by national policy.

It’s worth also noting that Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I) issued an executive order yesterday requiring all state agencies to recognize same-sex marriage. This new momentum only adds to the many Democratic Party Chairs who have endorsed a marriage equality plank as part of the party’s 2012 platform. New enthusiasm for marriage equality will also help in state ballot fights in Minnesota and Maine, as well as those expected in Washington and Maryland.  This surge is a testament to Obama’s leadership and the turning tide of history toward justice for all.

Yesterday, in a floor speech, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) admitted that the reformers were correct, and that the senators who kept the filibuster intact were wrong:

If there ever were a time when Tom Udall and Jeff Merkley were prophetic, it’s tonight. These two young, fine senators said it was time we changed the rules in the Senate, and we didn’t. They were right. The rest of us were wrong — or most of us now anyway. What a shame. So here we are, wasting time because of the Republicans. … And then, to top it off, one of the finest members of the Senate we’ve had, ever, was defeated yesterday by a man, listen to this, Mr. President, who campaigned on the platform that there’s too much compromise in the Senate. And he’s going to come back here and not compromise with anybody on anything. Now that’s what we need in the Senate, more people who are willing to do nothing but fight.

Watch it:

Reid’s frustration with the result in the Indiana GOP Senate primary closely maps concerns that ThinkProgress raised shortly after Tea Party candidate Richard Mourdock defeated long time incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN). In the wake of Mourdock’s success running on a platform of uncompromising obstructionism, it is unlikely that any Republican senator will be willing to cross party lines in order to pass even the most essential legislation or to fill crucial jobs such as a seat on the Supreme Court. As Reid now seems to recognize, the choice facing Senate Democrats is whether to dramatically reform the Senate rules or leave America completely unable to govern itself.

Despite their unwillingness to do so last year, however, they will have another opportunity to do so very soon — provided they have at least 51 votes in favor of reform. Next January, when the 113th Congress convenes, another window opens enabling the Senate’s rules to be changed by a simple majority vote.

Asked about the legalization of gay marriage at meeting with reporters Thursday, Reid said he believed those decisions should be made by states, based on the fact that domestic relations laws are set at the state level.

Asked then how he would vote if gay marriage was on the ballot in Nevada, Reid said, “I would follow my grandchildren and my children.”

“So you would support gay marriage?” he was asked.

He nodded yes as he walked away from the podium.

Reid is a Mormon who has previously said that he personally believes that marriage is a union between one mand and one woman.

“My personal belief is that marriage is between a man and a woman. But in a civil society, I believe that people should be able to marry whomever they want, and it’s no business of mine if two men or two women want to get married. The idea that allowing two loving, committed people to marry would have any impact on my life, or on my family’s life, always struck me as absurd.

“In talking with my children and grandchildren, it has become clear to me they take marriage equality as a given. I have no doubt that their view will carry the future.

“I handled a fair amount of domestic relations work when I was a practicing lawyer, and it was all governed by state law. I believe that is the proper place for this issue to be decided as well.”

This tradition, however, does not exactly have a longstanding pedigree. During the Reagan and the first Bush Administration, the blue slip tradition did indeed allow home state senators to block a judicial nominee, but only if both of these senators agreed. Indeed, this rule remained in effect until 1995, when Senate Republicans unilaterally changed it to make it easier to block President Clinton’s nominees with only one objecting senator — only to change back to Reagan Era rules once George W. Bush took office.

Heller now seems to think that, because a Democratic president is back in office, he should have the same power to unilaterally veto nominees that didn’t exist under Ronald Reagan or most of George W. Bush’s term. Fortunately, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) apparently thinks otherwise:

Reid, the Senate majority leader, said he plans to ask Leahy to bypass the blue slip process in this case and move forward with the Cadish nomination. He said the two could meet Thursday.

Reid said his staff has compiled clippings and other material on Cadish that he plans to show to Leahy.

“Leahy is a traditionalist around here,” Reid said. “I’ve gotten all the articles about this together and am going to visit with Pat and go over it, but I don’t think he will do it.“

There’s nothing wrong with being a traditionalist, but there’s also no real tradition giving Heller a unilateral veto over nominees. If one set of rules were good enough for Ronald Reagan, than they should be good enough for Barack Obama.

“As the result of a successful discussion among the minority leader, the White House and myself there will be no recess appointments during the coming adjournment,” said [Majority Leader Harry] Reid, speaking from the Senate floor.

In return, Republicans allowed passage by unanimous consent of several of President Obama’s noncontroversial nominees and allowed Reid to set up a vote on the confirmation of Stephanie Thacker to be a circuit judge for the Fourth Circuit for April 16, the day the Senate returns from its break.

It is, of course, unfortunate that Reid needs to strike a deal at all before the caucus that controls less than half the seats in the Senate will deign to allow completely noncontroversial nominees to move forward. Nevertheless, this incident proves the wisdom of Obama’s decision to make several recess appointments earlier this year despite McConnell’s objections. Prior to Obama’s actions, he and Reid had few bargaining chips they could use to prevent McConnell’s obstructionism in a Senate ruled by the filibuster. Now, Obama and Reid can use the threat of future recess appointments to ensure that the party that voters did not want to control the Senate does not have a total veto power over the president’s nominees.

As it turns out, this was not an effective messaging strategy for Mr. McConnell, who has now agreed to allow most of the seventeen judges to move forward:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced the agreement on the floor but said they wouldn’t provide any details until they briefed their respective caucuses later in the afternoon. However, aides said the deal will allow Democrats to move 12 district court judges and 2 circuit court judges by May 7.

Now, let’s be clear, this is not a perfect deal. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever why every judge who has cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee could not be confirmed today — and there is certainly no reason why judges who received little if any opposition in committee need to wait as long as May 7. It’s also inexcusable that one of President Obama’s most outstanding nominees, Ninth Circuit nominee Paul Watford, is not on the list of judges being confirmed (a list of the judges is below the jump).

Nevertheless, today’s deal is a massive improvement over the status quo. According to data provided by the Federal Judicial Center, the 112th Congress has confirmed judges at a rate of about 4.75 judges per month. Today’s deal, by contrast, means that fourteen new judges will be confirmed in just two months. This is a significant uptick — even if it is barely enough to make a dent in the 83 currently existing judicial vacancies — and Reid deserves credit for making this happen.

Indeed, there is an important lesson here for Reid and for progressive lawmakers in general. McConnell remains the most obstructionist Senate Leader in recent history, and he has been a constant barrier to ensuring our nation functions effectively from the moment President Obama took office. Nevertheless, we know now that he can be forced to back down. Harry Reid decided to fight this week, and he was rewarded for it. He should remember that fact the next time McConnell stands in the way.

—
According to a Senate source, the list of judges being confirmed are:

District Judges: Gina Marie Groh, of West Virginia; David Nuffer, of Utah; Michael Walter Fitzgerald, of California; Ronnie Abrams, of New York; Rudolph Contreras, of Virginia; Miranda Du, of Nevada; Susie Morgan, of Louisiana; Gregg Jeffrey Costa, of Texas; David Campos Guaderrama, of Texas; Brian C. Wimes, of Missouri; Kristine Gerhard Baker, of Arkansas; John Z. Lee, of Illinois;

Circuit Judges: Stephanie Dawn Thacker, 4th Circuit; Jacqueline Nguyen 9th Circuit

REID: I’ve got a great idea. My friend the Republican Leader said these judges are all going to get approved anyway, so I’ve got an idea. Let’s go to this IPO bill immediately after finishing the highway bill, with the agreement that we’ll dispose of these judges immediately after that. . . .

McCONNELL: It is highly unlikely any of these district judges are not going to be confirmed. We’ve done a number of them this year. We’ve done seven this year. District judges are almost never defeated. This is just a very transparent attempt to try to slam dunk the minority and make them look like they are obstructing things they aren’t obstructing. We object to that. We don’t think that meets the standard of civility that should be expected in the Senate. And, so, any effort to make the minority look bad or attempt to slam dunk them that is sort of manufactured as this is is gonna, of course, be greeted with resistance.

Watch it:

Let’s explain what’s going on here. Both Reid and McConnell agree that there is nothing objectionable about these judges — in McConnell’s words, “it is highly unlikely any of these district judges are not going to be confirmed.” Additionally, both men agree that the Senate should vote on the “IPO bill” that Reid refers to, a bill dealing with investments in small businesses that recently passed the House. Initially, Reid wanted to vote on the seventeen judges awaiting confirmation before moving on to the IPO bill, but he even concedes this point — saying that he is willing to “go to this IPO bill” first as McConnell prefers.

And then McConnell says this deal is unacceptable because Reid “ma[de] the minority look bad.”

If this is truly McConnell’s reason for blocking these judges, then he just made an absolutely shocking admission. Thanks to excessive judicial vacancies, America’s courts are increasingly unable to function. In some courts, judges are so overburdened they have to rush major felony cases through as if they involved minor traffic violations. In one court, felony caseloads nearly doubled in just two years. Every court that is unable to handle its caseload means wrongly fired workers waiting months or years for justice and businesses that must delay making new hires until they are sure they won’t be hit with an unwarranted legal judgment. And yet McConnell says he is willing to punish all of these workers and businesses because he is upset that Reid has made him look bad. America can ill afford this kind of tantrum.

I think that the president did the minimal with his recess appointments — the minimal. I think he’s waited far too long. If something doesn’t break here, I’m going to recommend to the president he recess appoint all these people — every one of them.

Watch it:

Reid’s statement is the second time in two months that he’s indicated the highly unproductive status quo is not acceptable. Last month, when President Obama endorsed significant filibuster reform to ensure that all nominees receive an up or down vote in the Senate, Reid largely endorsed the proposal. His statement on Friday is another hopeful sign that Reid’s caucus might be prepared to take real action to ensure that the Senate minority can no longer threaten our government’s ability to function.

For obstructionist Senate Republicans, however, there is a certain irony behind Reid’s latest statement. The most obstructionist members of the Senate, such as Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), claim their opposition to the president’s nominees is justified to preserve the Senate’s role as a gatekeeper over people appointed to key government jobs — and, when done in good faith, such a gatekeeper role is genuinely important. Presidential appointees wield tremendous power, and, in a perfect world, should not be given that kind of power without some kind of evaluation of their fitness to hold it.

At the same time, however, the worst of all possible worlds is one where government cannot function at all due to blanket obstruction of the president’s nominees.

If obstructionists like Lee force the president to use blanket recess appointments in order to simply keep our nation functioning, the irony is that they will achieve the opposite of what they set out to accomplish. The Senate should conduct good faith reviews of each nominee and vote down the ones they deem unacceptable, but if an obstructionist minority is unwilling to operate in good faith than the president has no choice but to make sure that American government can function properly without them.

Instead of finding commonsense solutions, the Republicans are talking about things that have nothing to do with middle-income taxes — like the Keystone pipeline, rolling back regulations to keep our air safe and our water clean and pure. These tactics are stalling — more evidence the Republicans don’t want to extend this tax cut. They talk about extending it but simply are unwilling to do anything to make it a reality.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) agreed. “So we say to Speaker Boehner, instruct your conferees to drop the issue of Boiler MACT.”

The agreement resolved the last stalemate in a year of bitter congressional fighting that earned lawmakers their lowest approval ratings in recent memory.

In exchange for supporting the 60-day patch, Republicans secured minor face-saving concessions from Senate leaders, who had already passed a two-month deal on an overwhelming vote of 89 to 10. Senate leaders had balked at the House’s demand to restart talks over the holidays on a full-year extension of the tax cut.

The Senate agreed to make a technical change to the payroll tax reporting requirements, designed to lessen the burden on small businesses of implementing the two-month deal.

And Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) promised he would appoint a conference committee to take up negotiations after New Year’s Day on ways to pay for a full-year tax cut.

Both chambers will pass the plan by unanimous consent so long as no member shows up to voice opposition in person, which lets the deal pass even though most members have gone home. There was no opposition to the deal in the Senate Friday morning. The two-month extension gives House and Senate leaders time to negotiate for a yearlong extension after the holiday recess. “I am grateful that the voices of reason have prevailed,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said in a statement.

But so far, a few House freshmen have threatened to stop the deal. Freshman Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) said he was “not yet sure” if he would protest the deal, and Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) told CNN’s John King Thursday night, “I’m not so sure I’m not going to do that,” when asked if he’d drive to Washington, D.C. to stop the deal.

Boehner acknowledged the pressure he has felt, telling reporters Thursday that “I talked to enough members over the last 24 hours who say we don’t like the two-month extension and if you can get this fixed, why not do the right thing for the American people even if it’s not exactly what we want.”

Boehner received pressure from his own party — Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called on the House to pass the two month extension yesterday — as well as the public. After the White House asked people to say what $40 — the average amount an American worker would lose per paycheck without the extension — would mean to them, thousands of people responded on Twitter using the #40dollars hashtag.

In a letter sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton earlier this month, Reid expressed concerns about the environmental impact of the project. The Washington Post reported on the October 5th correspondence:

“The proponents of this pipeline would be wiser to invest instead in job-creating clean energy projects, like renewable power, energy efficiency or advanced vehicles and fuels that would employ thousands of people in the United States rather than increasing our dependency on unsustainable supplies of dirty and polluting oil that could easily be exported,” Reid wrote.

Reid has been a strong supporter of clean energy and has maintained that support during a time of severe Congressional backlash against government incentives for the sector. But this is the first time he has publicly given his opinions on the Keystone XL Pipeline — a project that has united environmental activists and split the Democratic party.

Some Congressional Democrats have remained silent on the issue, waiting for the State Department to make a decision. Others have thrown their support behind the pipeline, which they say will create jobs and boost tax revenues.

Meanwhile, the environmental community is putting heavy pressure on the Obama Administration to delay or abandon Keystone XL, calling it “game over for the climate.” They’re also highlighting the immense conflicts of interest within the State Department and the proposed builder, TransCanada — pointing out that the agency outsourced the environmental review of the project to a TransCanada contractor.

Many see this as the ultimate test of the Obama Administration’s commitment to combating climate change. Harry Reid, one of the most powerful Democrats in Washington, appears to see it that way too.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) weighed in for the first time on Oct. 5 in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton questioning the 1,700-mile project that would stretch from Canada to the Gulf Coast:

“The proponents of this pipeline would be wiser to invest instead in job-creating clean energy projects, like renewable power, energy efficiency or advanced vehicles and fuels that would employ thousands of people in the United States rather than increasing our dependency on unsustainable supplies of dirty and polluting oil that could easily be exported,” Reid wrote.

But after the bankruptcy of Solyndra — a solar energy company — Stephen Brown, vice president of federal government affairs for oil refiner Tesoro, asked why Reid would even focus on renewable energy instead of oil. “It will come as a shock to the tens of thousands of professional skilled American refinery workers, many of whom are union members, that their jobs do not have the same cachet as politically correct ‘green jobs’ in Solyndra-like endeavors,” Brown said.

In contrast to Reid’s letter, 22 House Democrats sent a letter to Obama asking him to support the Keystone XL project because of the jobs it could create:

[T]he Keystone XL Pipeline will inject $20 billion of private sector investment into the American economy, create 20,000 direct jobs, spur the creation of 118,000 spin-off jobs, payout $5 billion in taxes to local counties over the project’s lifetime, bolster America’s energy security and strengthen our national security. [...] We are confident that the Department of State’s review process and the project operator’s commitment to employing well-trained union workers will yield the most appropriately routed, safest and environmentally sound pipeline in our nation.

Out of the entire House Democratic Caucus, 22 members is hardly a majority, and most who signed onto the letter are moderate Blue Dog Democrats. And the State Department estimates that the pipeline will create fewer jobs than TransCanada has estimated, with many being temporary positions. The environmental risks for a pipeline crossing the United States and Canada also could be much higher than previous assumed, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Previously, former Vice President Al Gore has pushed for Obama to block the pipeline, and Gov. Dave Heineman (R-NE) has said he opposes the pipeline because of the risk it would pose to one of his state’s major water supplies.

Harry Reid, reflecting on the Senate GOP minority’s filibuster of a majority-backed American Jobs Act, offered a critique that I believe is new for him:

“Republicans think that if the economy improves, it might help President Obama,” Mr. Reid said. “So they root for the economy to fail and oppose every effort to improve it.”

I think Rick Perry’s infamous threats against Ben Bernanke really broke the seal on this. Perry said it would be treasonous for the Fed to enact new monetary stimulus to help Barack Obama. But how would monetary stimulus help Barack Obama? Well, it would help Obama if it helped the economy, but not otherwise. So it would be treasonous for Bernanke to help the economy because doing so would indirectly help Obama.

Most politicians have better message discipline than that, and most human beings have more advanced psychological mechanisms at their disposal for resolving cognitive dissonance. So I doubt that the GOP is sitting around in their caucus meetings chuckling about their “recession —> Obama electoral defeat” plan. At the same time, people have a way of aligning their thinking with their interests. So the GOP has succeeded in hurting the economy with premature fiscal austerity, hurting the economy with the debt ceiling panic, hurting the economy with letters opposing monetary stimulus, and now will of course also oppose efforts at expansionary fiscal policy. And why not? Less growth really is better for them.

But I also say, Mr. President, in its present form, I’m going to have some difficulty bringing this bill to the floor. It contains provisions relating to the detention of terrorism suspects that in the words of national security adviser John Brennan would be, and I quote, “disastrous. It would tie the hands of our counterterrorism professionals by eliminating tools and authorities that have been absolutely essential to their success.”

To show you how extremely important it is that we do something about these provisions in this bill that are just wrong, both the Judiciary Committee in the Senate and the Intelligence Committee in the Senate have asked for hearings on this provision in this bill.

Watch the video:

In a September speech, Brennan, a deputy national security adviser, decried any “rigid, inflexible approach” to terrorism that would stop the Obama administration from taking its “practical, flexible, results-driven approach that maximizes our intelligence collection and preserves our ability to prosecute dangerous individuals.”

A day after his floor comments, Reid sent a letter the Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and Ranking Member John McCain (R-AZ) informing them that he didn’t intend to bring the National Defense Authorization Act to the floor until it was stripped of the detention provisions. In the letter, Reid objected to:

[T]he authorization of indefinite detention in section 1031, the requirement for mandatory military custody of terrorism suspects in Section 1032, and the stringent restrictions on transfer of detainees in Section 1033. [...]

I strongly believe that we must maintain the capability and flexibility to effectively apply the full range of tools at our disposal to combat terrorism. This includes the use of our criminal justice system, which has accumulated an impressive record of success in bringing terrorists to justice.

In his floor speech, Reid cited a compromise over last year’s National Defense Authorization Act, which originally included a repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy on gays in the military. Republicans filibustered the authorization and Democrats relented, taking the DADT repeal out of the bill and agreeing to put it forward later as a separate vote. Reid asked that McCain take the same approach to the terrorism detention provisions in this year’s authorization.

In an interview with Climate Progress, Senator Reid (D-NV) lamented the breakdown of bi-partisan support for renewable energy, saying many conservative members of Congress were “making a concerted effort to thwart development” of clean energy.

When asked whether Congress would be able to pass even the most basic support mechanisms for renewable energy like the PTC, Reid answered: “I’m hopeful, but not confident we can get them passed.”

The PTC, which provides wind project owners 2.1 cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity produced, is a fundamental incentive for the industry. However, unlike permanent credits embedded in the tax code for oil and gas producers, the PTC is only extended every couple of years. That creates immense uncertainty in the sector in the lead-up to the expiration.

If the PTC expires, the wind industry would see a massive decline in installations, effectively choking one of the fastest-growing energy sectors in the country. During previous lapses in the tax credit, national installations fell by between 70% and 90%.

The PTC is set to expire at the end of 2012. Because it can take years to plan large wind farms, many projects are delayed or abandoned if a developer is unsure about completing the facility in time to qualify for tax credits.

Since 2009, wind developers have been able to take an investment tax credit worth 30% of a project’s cost or an equivalent 30% cash grant through the Treasury, rather than the PTC. The Treasury Grant Program has been immensely helpful to the wind industry at a time when tax equity investors (financial institutions that owe enough in taxes to acquire the credits and help fund projects) have been limited.

After a drop-off in installations in 2009 because of the financial crisis and stiff competition with cheap natural gas, the industry is rebounding. In the first half of 2011, developers doubled the amount of capacity that they put online in the first half of 2010.

But with the Treasury grant program set to expire in January and the PTC only around for another year, the wind industry is approaching the edge of a cliff.

Other industries that rely on the PTC like geothermal, biomass and hydro won’t face expiration until the end of 2013. But they too could be in a similar situation if no extension is in place before then.

It’s an all-too-common story for a sector that must deal with on-again, off-again support.

Reid said earlier this summer that any jobs package pushed by Democrats would focus heavily on clean energy jobs. And in his speeches at last week’s National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas, he was bullish about the long-term prospects for renewable energy in the U.S.

But off the stage, Reid was a lot more realistic about the fight within Congress over industry support.

“I would like to say we’re off and running and going to do all these great things. We’re going to try to do them. And I want to do them. But anything that we’re being asked to do is going to be hard to do.”

And in the last couple of years, a number of CSP developers have partnered with natural gas and coal operators to create hybrid solar/fossil plants in an effort to lower the installed cost of solar and make fossil generation more efficient.

It was only a matter of time before we saw the hybrid geothermal-solar plant.

A group of business and policy leaders were in Las Vegas at the National Clean Energy Summit this morning announcing the groundbreaking of the world’s first solar-geothermal power plant – a 24-MW facility that will combine 80,000 polycrystalline PV modules with traditional hydrothermal technology.

One of the largest power plant developers in the world, Enel, is building the project. The company decided to go with PV because of the cost competitiveness of the technology. But Enel is also in the early stages of developing a similar hybrid Concentrating Solar Power-Geothermal “test plant” in the same location.

“All these things are going to be necessary as we move into renewables,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu, speaking at the press conference. “This is an incredible new technology that can be used across the country.”

Secretary Chu was joined by Nevada Senator Harry Reid, Center for American Progress CEO John Podesta, Enel Green Power’s Francesco Venturini, and Bombard Renewable Energy’s Chris Brooks.

The speakers focused heavily on the jobs issue – explaining the importance of consistent federal policy in helping grow jobs in this emerging sector. At the peak of construction, this solar-geothermal plant will create 250 jobs.

“We have the opportunity to lead the world in this market,” explained Secretary Chu.

Senator Reid decried the continued uncertainty on the federal level, explaining that Democrats will make an increased push for clean energy in the fall.

“This is a debate we can win publicly. This is an energy revolution that other countries have embraced with arms wide open,” said Reid.

The National Clean Energy Summit will be streaming speeches and roundtables on clean energy policy and technologies. Check out the NCES 4.0 website to see this morning’s speeches from Secretary Chu, Senator Reid, Vice President Biden and more. We’ll be speaking to a number of leaders at the summit, so look out for more interviews.

Reid, Chu and Biden Kick Off the Day, Climate Progress Will Have Exclusive Interterviews

Politico opens its Morning Energy briefing:

TODAY’S MAIN EVENT: The big happening in energy this week is the fourth annual Clean Energy Summit today in Las Vegas, where Vice President Joe Biden, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval, California Gov. Jerry Brown and Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire are headlining.

Senate majority leader Harry Reid released highlights from his opening remarks:

“Advanced energy technology — from new vehicles and smarter appliances to more efficient electric grids and cleaner power plants — have the power to change the way we live for the better. It offers us a pathway to a more secure and independent America — one that isn’t dependent on oil from unstable regions of the world but rather embraces the American spirit of innovation. It offers manufacturing and construction workers who have struggled to find jobs during these tough economic times a chance to get back to work building solar panels, transmission grids and high-speed trains.

“This summit gives each of us a glimpse of our clean energy future. It will also help us see why we need to build on our clean energy achievements, not surrender our leadership to other countries who have also made clean energy a top priority.”

Climate Progress clean energy reporter Stephen Lacey is on the scene, and he will have exclusive interviews with many of the speakers, which we will post today and  tomorrow.

Details on the event are here.