Posted on 05/13/2008 6:19:29 AM PDT by crazyhorse691
Sen. John McCain's Portland-based global warming manifesto now puts all three presidential candidates -- and both major parties' leaders -- firmly in favor of aggressive cuts to greenhouse gases.
McCain's goals, including cutting greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, are less aggressive than those of Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, his potential Democratic opponents.
But they're a quantum leap from the goals in his home state. Under Arizona's plan, the state's emissions would still be 35 percent above 1990 levels by 2020.
And they're a bit tougher than the combined efforts of the Western Climate Initiative, a group of Western states -- including Oregon -- and Canadian provinces working now on their own global warming plan.
It's a long way from promise to law. But for some, McCain's speech signals a sea change in the policies of the nation.
Jeremy Symons, executive director of the National Wildlife Federation's global warming campaign, said it marks the beginning of the "post-Bush era" on climate change.
"It's now clear that at some point we will implement a strong plan to deal with global warming," Symons said. "The urgency centers on how fast we can do it and making sure we don't waste any more time."
All three presidential candidates have sought to show their green sides when campaigning in Oregon. McCain's mandate on global warming, the one issue where he wins most environmental favor, may also reflect a rising tide of states demanding action on greenhouse gases.
Oregon and Washington have adopted some of the most ambitious state goals for cutting emissions.
"For those of us in the Pacific Northwest, it's kind of an exciting time because we have been able to leverage some movement at the state level into a much wider debate," said Eric de Place of the Sightline Institute, a nonpartisan think tank in Seattle.
The centerpiece of McCain's approach to slowing global warming is a nationwide "cap-and-trade" system for reducing emissions -- setting an overall pollution limit, then letting individual polluters buy and sell emissions allowances within that limit.
Political minefields
But in delivering his manifesto Monday, he also stepped directly on two of the biggest ideological land mines around global warming reductions. He endorsed nuclear power and proposed to crack down on China and India if they don't adopt similar caps to control their accelerating emissions.
McCain, like the other candidates, also avoided addressing some key questions about the impacts of his plan, including costs to electricity and natural gas ratepayers.
The Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, pending now before the Senate but facing a potential veto from President Bush, would require roughly comparable emissions cuts by 2020 as McCain's plan. A recent analysis by the Energy Information Administration concluded that the bill would boost utility rates from 5 percent to 27 percent by 2020, with the range depending on how fast new emissions reduction technology develops.
McCain, Clinton and Obama all favor a cap-and-trade system, similar to that used in Europe to address global warming and in the United States to reduce acid rain pollution from coal plants. Their plans differ some: McCain's 2050 goal is for at least a 60 percent reduction; Obama and Clinton favor 80 percent.
Many scientists say an 80 percent cut is needed to limit human-caused warming to just a few degrees, but such a deep cut also would be tougher to achieve.
"It would be disingenuous for people to undersell the significance of the challenge we're facing," de Place said.
Under cap-and-trade, the U.S. government would set a limit, or cap, on greenhouse gas emissions. Then it would allocate or sell pollution credits to utilities, industries and others included in the plan, based on their historic releases minus a share of the reduction goal.
In theory, polluters that could cut pollution most easily and cheaply would do so, then sell any excess credits to polluters that couldn't, allowing them to continue polluting as long as the overall cap isn't exceeded.
Polluters could also buy "offsets" by reducing greenhouse gas emissions outside the system, paying farmers to cut their use of gas-emitting fertilizer, for example, or subsidizing longer growing seasons on wood lots. McCain emphasized offsets in his speech Monday.
Using offsets opens the door to fuzzy accounting, though, because it's not clear how much greenhouse gases can be locked away through such methods or how long they will be removed from the system.
For instance, trees capture carbon dioxide, giving forest owners a market opportunity to get paid for keeping their trees standing. But can they assure that the trees won't burn up in wildfires, releasing the greenhouse gases back into the air?
Cap-and-trade relies on a government-mandated goal. But McCain and other supporters say it allows the free market -- not regulators -- to more efficiently control how pollution control actually gets done. A similar system effectively curtailed acid rain.
Northwest advantage
But the Pacific Northwest already emits far less greenhouse gases to produce electricity than most of the rest of the country because so much of the region's power comes from nonpolluting hydroelectric dams. Regional leaders say it's important that the region get credit for that advantage in any national system.
Oregon and Washington also are home to growing numbers of alternative energy companies, which are looking to Washington for continued government support. Here, McCain offered a mixed bag of goodies.
He would direct government aid toward the research and development of new technologies. But he wouldn't encourage long-term subsidies for particular industries, such as the tax credits currently in place for wind, solar and other renewable power resources.
"He wants to be fair and judicious" with tax credits, said Doug Holtz-Eaken, McCain's senior policy adviser, in a conference call later in the day.
Wind and solar subsidies are set to expire by year's end. Holtz-Eaken said McCain might support a short-term extension of the credits but "we'd look down the road to see if they're still necessary" once cap-and-trade policies were in place. Obama supports a 5-year extension. Clinton would make the credits permanent.
Oregon and Washington have experienced a boom in wind farm development in recent years, with hundreds of turbines rising in the breezy Columbia River Gorge.
Wind-energy companies, including Vestas Americas -- which served as the backdrop for McCain's speech -- say further growth will stall if the tax credits expire. The industry is vigorously lobbying for an extension.
Scott Learn: 503-294-7657; scottlearn@news.oregonian.com. Michael Milstein: 503-294-7689; michaelmilstein@news. oregonian.com Gail Kinsey Hill: 503-221-8590; gailhill@news.oregonian.com. For environment news, go to oregonlive.com/environment
That will be known as a "Standing Headline" in a McLame presidency.
You beat me to the punch
Screw McCain and the jackass he rode in on.
Alrighty then, McCainiacs, Defend THIS one. Tell me how I should vote for him because he is so much better than Obama..
LOL!
What a POS!
It appears McCain is at least 20% better than an America hating marxist.
Or this might have happened to George Westinghouse, founder of the technology company of the same name.
Sorry - yes, I made a C in history. But hey, most of it happened long before I was born.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
stupid and confused; "blathering like the addlepated nincompoop that you are"; "a confused puddingheaded, muddleheaded fellow"- Isaac Sterne
WE ARE SO SCREWED!
He voted for both John Roberts and Samuel Alito.
You believe he will deliver on the kind of Judges he has promised
I believe it's at least 50/50 that he will nominate good judges. And that's a 50% better chance than we have with the other guy. That's not even debatable.
WOW! And on Alito, the YEAs were:
| Akaka (D-HI) Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (R-UT) Bingaman (D-NM) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Burr (R-NC) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) |
Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) DeWine (R-OH) Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Enzi (R-WY) Frist (R-TN) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Inouye (D-HI) Isakson (R-GA) Johnson (D-SD) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN) |
Martinez (R-FL) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Pryor (D-AR) Roberts (R-KS) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Santorum (R-PA) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Specter (R-PA) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Talent (R-MO) Thomas (R-WY) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) |
So McCain votes with Bryd, Chafee, Dorgan, Inouye, Landrieu, and Rockefeller! What a Siver Lining!
NAYs ---22 Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
On the vote for Justice Alito, here are the NAYS:
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)
So there you have it. One candidate--MCCAIN--voted YEA on both Roberts and Alito. The other candidate--OBAMA--voted NAY on both.
It's not a debatable point. The facts are what they are. Did you intentionally hide the simple truth? Are you an OBAMA mole, or just dumb?
Yes we are. When I first saw the caption, I wondered why is this news? McCain has always joined the democrats.
No conservative candidates were supported by the republican party?....You can thank those asshats also!
A guy with TWO last names is his senior policy adviser......ooookkkkaaaayyyyyy......now I get it.
bump
Neither! What part of "No Personal Attacks" didn't you understand?
There is nothing, NOTHING, "free market" about an artificial, government mandated, "cap and trade".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.