Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘climate bill’

A report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says the climate & energy bill currently stalled in the Senate would reduce the federal deficit by about $19 billion over the next ten years.  The CBO is responsible for providing Congress with nonpartisan analyses of economic and budget issues, and lawmakers rely on it for guidance.  This is the second positive analysis of the bill by a government agency in a month.  A  similar report was issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in June.

Many senators have said they flatly oppose legislation that adds even a penny to the federal deficit, and these two reports should force them to look anew at this initiative which will actually reduce it.

In its report Wednesday, the CBO said the energy bill would increase federal revenues by about $751 billion from 2011 to 2020, mostly though the sale of carbon credits in a cap-and-trade plan to be applied to utilities and other sectors of the economy. (more…)

Read Full Post »

EDITOR’S NOTE: At this rate, we may actually finish reviewing the year in blog 2009 by the end of January 2010– just how we wanted to start the year!!  But… stuff keeps happening…. and we can’t blog! Or we have to blog about the important, breaking news stuff!  So, sorry for dragging this out, but we hope you’re having fun reminiscing as much as we are blogging about it.

5. The Little Climate Bill That Couldn’t

We had high hopes coming into 2009.  Congressmen Waxman and Markey were hard at work on draft legislation that they promised would meet scientific standards on climate change.  They had even collected signatures from the majority of their caucus on principles that they would build off of. And those principles were pretty good.  So was Obama’s proposed budget, which showed they had revenue plans starting in 2012 of a 100% auction of CO2 credits- a 100% auction being the method that most agree brings quicker pollution reductions and is also, according to the EPA, the least regressive method of implementation.  Hey, anything that hurts poor people the least is what we want to do, right?

WRONG. Clearly, you think differently than the majority of the US Congress.

Then Waxman and Markey released their draft legislation – our reaction was not pretty. Texas Congressmen had been complicit in weakening the bill away from the standards of the original principles.

Good Points:

  • AMAZING building code and appliance standards for energy efficiency
  • Good long term (2050) and short term (2020) goal for carbon reduction (still needed to be improved to what science calls for- but a good start)
  • Had a renewable energy mandate and an efficiency mandate: we’d get 20% of our power from renewables by 2020 and increase energy efficiency by an additional 10%.

Bad points

  • Well… all of those goals could be bigger.
  • No language on how the carbon credits would be auctioned or allocated.  Nada. Left to be decided later. Like a “scene missing” slide in a Nine Inch Nails video that gets crazier and scarier as time goes on….

And then the hearings on the bill started.  In typical fashion, climate denier troglodytes like Texas’ own Joe Barton tried to slow down the proceedings– by insisting that the entire bill and its amendments be read aloud before the committee.  Because of this unprecedented demand, the House Energy and Commerce Committee simply hired a speedreader.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_SB7g_Yb-0]

If only that had been the extent of the funny business with the bill… but both behind closed doors and by amendment in the committee, the climate bill got gutted.  First, special giveaways to the nuclear industry. Then to the coal industry. Then decreasing the renewables and efficiency goals by almost half.  Then offsets language that guaranteed that polluters would be able to continue to pollute above the cap– meaning in a bill whose primary purpose is to make sure we curb pollution so we don’t fry the planet, our emissions might actually GO UP, not down. And the bill passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee, its largest hurdle, but by then it had been incredibly compromised.  Our immediate reaction was:  follow the money (ad this remains the single best explanation of what happened to the climate bill to date, imho– it also helps that I wrote it).

But they weren’t done with the gutting of the bill yet…

Then special giveaways to the agribusiness industry. And finally, the coup de grace, they stripped the EPA of their authority to regulate greenhouse gases through the Clean Air Act.

During all of this, we were trying our best to stand up for ordinary Texans against these corporate interests– you may have seen us at the King William Parade in San Antonio, telling San Antonio’s Congressman Gonzalez, “Sorry Charlie, Bailouts Aren’t Green.”  I think aside from crashing the Energy Citizens Rally this was the most fun I had all year.

We were, to say the least, conflicted.  We REALLY REALLY REALLY wanted a climate bill.  But what we got was a climate disaster.  The Waxman-Markey Bill, co-authored by your special interest friends, passed on June 28.  Ugh.  It’s like sending out a birth announcement of a really, really ugly baby.  Or opening a beautifully wrapped present you thought was the perfect gift but finding instead the world’s ugliest Christmas sweater.  Disappointment? That’s not strong enough.  To use the parlance of our day: #EPIC FAIL.

The Senate side hasn’t fared much better.  Despite a decent framework from Senators Kerry and Boxer (it really needs to be improved, but it could be worse) passing through the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (partisan knuckledraggers, led by Denier-in-Chief James Inhofe, actually boycotted the hearings and the vote), it has yet to be worked on by the Senate Finance Committee (who, you may have heard, was REALLY busy working on some bill having to do with health care.  It didn’t get much media coverage, so you may have missed it. </sarcasm>)

Meanwhile, others felt that both the Boxer bill and the Waxman-Markey bill were DOA in the Senate, so a tri-partisan group of Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), John Kerry (D-MA- look! I got my name on TWO climate bills this Congress!), and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) have said they would develop their own climate bill.  No word yet on their framework (a draft could come any day now), but, unfortunately signs are pointing to “not good”.  It seems the only thing the three of them can really agree on is more pork for nuclear.

However, the EPA in December issued an endangerment finding for greenhouse gases, the next step in actually regulating them, as they were ordered to do in 2007’s Massachusetts v EPA Supreme Court case.  So a year that began on a hopeful note went bad, then worse…. but ended with a little ray of sunshine.  Here’s to a New Year’s Resolution of ACTUALLY passing a climate and clean energy bill that can ACTUALLY fight climate change and create more clean energy. And just like that New Year’s Res to lose 10 pounds, this year we REALLY mean it!

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Environmentalists may soon find a powerful ally in big business.  Some of the United States’ top corporations are now rallying together in support of climate and energy reform, after finally realizing the severity of climate change and the negative effects of global warming on our society.  Several Fortune 500 companies, including GE, Johnson & Johnson, HP, eBay, and the Gap, have joined together to form two core coalitions.  The groups—armed with million dollar advertising budgets—plan to nudge Washington toward the passing of comprehensive climate change legislation.  Participating business executives claim that “many businesses, and the overall economy, would eventually benefit from the new law.”

This week, an assemblage of over 150 entrepreneurs, investors, manufacturers, and energy providers—under the banner of the We Can Lead business group—will march to Capitol Hill to show their support for energy legislation such as this year’s American Clean Energy and Security Act.  The attendees will receive media training, go to policy briefings, and have the opportunity to meet and greet with key policy makers.  The main message for the event?  A climate bill is good for the earth, AND good for business.

Contrary to popular belief, not all businesses are alarmed by the alleged high costs of a new climate bill.  Some 28 companies and green groups, including United Technologies and the Nature Conservatory, are paying a pretty penny in advertising to publicly voice their support of energy reform.  The seven-figure campaign will be launched this Tuesday and, hopefully, other companies will take note and realize that there aren’t sufficient financial reasons to fear a climate bill.

Exelon Corp. is one such company participating in both the advocacy events on Capitol Hill and the allied advertising campaign.  As the largest nuclear power company in the nation, Exelon made waves earlier this month when the company left the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  The company claims the two bodies simply did not see eye-to-eye on climate change issues.  Exelon is not alone in its flight from the Chamber.  California’s PG&E Corp. and New Mexico’s PNM Resources also announced plans last week to disband from the national business alliance.  Most recently, Apple pulled out and Nike relinquished its spot on the group’s board of directors.  The latter also claims its views on climate change differ drastically from those of the Chamber; however the company plans to retain their membership and continue their efforts toward new climate change legislation.  Much of this disapproval came directly after the Chamber publicly challenged positive findings from the federal EPA concerning the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions by the Clean Air Act.

Built at the peak of a major Republican decade, some would say that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a mostly conservative, antiregulatory lobbying group.  Now that Washington seems to be swaying to the liberal side—essentially becoming more populist and green, the major faces of big business are skeptical of being associated with institutions as such.

According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce website, the group hopes to promote five core principles in regards to climate change.

Any legislation or regulation introduced must:

  1. Preserve American jobs and competitiveness of U.S. industry;
  2. Provide an international, economy-wide solution, including developing nations;
  3. Promote accelerated development and deployment of greenhouse gas reduction technology;
  4. Reduce barriers to the development of climate-friendly energy sources; and
  5. Promote energy conservation and efficiency.

The group’s stance on global warming legislation is currently and constantly publicly disputed by various parties on the big business roster, including their former members.

From the We Can Lead two-day rally in Washington to the powerfully proclaimed ‘pro-climate bill’ advertising campaigns; from the recent exodus of corporate icons from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the overall vocal support for climate change legislation.  It seems as if corporate America and the American public alike view climate change as a business worth investing in.

Read Full Post »

round upHere we are in August, and like every other week it’s time for another Texas Progressive Alliance blog roundup.

TXsharon needs your help to Expose This Dirty Video.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme calls out KBH and the GOP for using racism and the NRA to get out the vote in 2010. Having a competent, experienced Latina judge? Not important.

Off the Kuff reminds us that Governor Perry’s consistently wrong decisions regarding unemployment insurance will cost the state two billion dollars, maybe more.

McBlogger takes a look at a lawsuit against TRS and discovers losses, possible corruption and a nightmarish problem for the Republicans in 2010.

John Coby says you better think before you trust a republican with your family’s health care.

Mean Rachel decides that Democratic gubernatorial candidate is still too Bush League for her tastes.

Our governor is living the life of the rich and famous. It does so on our dime and on the “dimes” of his fat cat contributors. Libby Shaw gives us the ulgy details over at TexasKaos, Our Kept Governor to the Unemployed: Eat Cake.

Why did Ciro Rodriguez vote against the Waxman-Markey climate change bill and then suddenly flee the House? And why is he taking grip-and-grin meetings with David Dewhurst? PDiddie at Brains and Eggs would really like to know.

Vince at Capitol Annex tells why he believes that the smart money is on Texas Governor Rick Perry picking Lt. Governor David Dewhurst to replace U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison if she resigns before the end of the year.

Neil at Texas Liberal posted a video he made that will take only 39 seconds your life to watch. Also, Neil made a post marking the third anniversary of Texas Liberal. Texas Liberal has run 1500 page views a day so far this year and had racked-up over 725,000 views since it began. Thank you blog reading public!!

WhosPlayin notes that the City of Lewisville is cancelling its Cinco de Mayo celebration for 2010 due to budgetary concerns.

Dembones at Eye On Williamson points out Rep. John Carter’s latest nuttiness, Franking Commission draws the line on Rep. Carter.

Mike Thomas at Rhetoric & Rhythm reviews Debra Medina’s campaign video and deems her the Sarah Palin of South Texas.

Teddy of Left of College Station was forced to evacuate his home in Bryan due to a warehouse fire that was burning toxic materials, but was able to return to his home the next day. Before the evacuation Teddy was able to write about Michael Vick’s return to the NFL, and whether or not he deserves a second chance. Left of College Station also covers the local and progressive events in the Bryan-College Station this month.

Read Full Post »

If you missed Tuesday night’s episode of The Daily Show, you did not get to see John Stewart and guest Steven Chu (Obama’s Nobel Prize winning Secretary of Energy) discuss the Waxman-Markey climate bill and America’s energy future. For those who missed it here are some highlights:

Jon Stewart Jizz-Ams in Front of Children – Cap’n Trade
Steven Chu

I couldn’t agree more with point made by Jon Stewart in the first clip. The best intentions of the original bill were radically altered to accommodate the financial interests of big energy corporations. This highlights the need to strengthen the bill in the Senate. I also enjoyed Jon Stewart’s discussion of global warming denial with Secretary Chu.  Its amazing how misinformed our population can be, and unfortunately this includes many of our Representatives in Congress.

Read Full Post »