Posted on 05/30/2008 11:24:49 AM PDT by BloodOrFreedom
Senate to Take Up Landmark Climate Legislation
With the country in the grips of near-hysteria over soaring gasoline prices, Congress begins debate Monday on landmark climate legislation that critics say will substantially increase energy costs – and not produce any of the intended environmental benefits.
“It seems unlikely that as American families face harsh economic times that any Senator would dare stand on the Senate floor and vote in favor of significantly increasing the price of gas at the pump and cost millions of American jobs – all for no environmental gain,” says Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) , a long time climate change skeptic, who still favors a full and open debate.
Supporters of the American Climate Security Act, on the other hand, say the recent the recent spike in gas prices provides powerful new impetus for adopting the bill.
Thus, the stage is set for a spirited debate on the economic consequences of the far-reaching bill -- also known by the surnames of its co-sponsors Senators John Warner (R-Va.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Ct.) -- that will very likely begin a major overhaul of the country’s energy infrastructure.
One area bound to receive considerable attention is the price of fuel. Gasoline prices could rise by 13 cents per gallon the first year the legislation is in place, 2012, and by 48 cents by 2030, according to study by NERA Consulting for a National Petrochemical and Refiners Association.
In aggregate that is $624 billion in additional costs between 2012-2030 for the motor fuels sector – 85 percent of which would be passed on to the consumer.
With gasoline prices at record highs, those higher costs may not sit well with consumers, business owners or voters.
“There is no good time to take up a bill like this just because of what it does – increase prices - regardless of what energy costs are currently,” says Bill Holbrook of the NPRA, one of a number of industry groups opposed to the bill.
Supporters say such price increase projections are dwarfed by recent price spikes, which are themselves an argument for reducing demand and dependence on foreign oil.
“If you are looking for the long-term solution to the problem of foreign oil dependence and raising gas process, this bill is precisely the answer,” says Tony Kreindler of the Environmental Defense Fund.
He points to an MIT analysis of Warner-Lieberman which concluded the US would spend $20 billion less on oil imports by 2020 and $81 billion less by 2030.
“To make the argument that climate policy is going to increase the pain at the pump is disingenuous – it’s scare tactics, plain and simple – we have seen the same thing with every major environmental initiative,”
Given the complexity of the climate legislation and White House opposition, few expect the Warner-Lieberman bill --or a broadly similar House version -- to pass in the current Congress.
All three presidential candidates support some form of cap-and-trade scheme, the centerpiece of the current bill, but most observers expect final adoption of climate legislation will have to await a new president, unless some dramatic evidence of global warming jolts Washington into acting sooner.
Still, next week’s debate will provide the American public – and investors - with a critical glimpse of the brave new energy future, in which carbon emissions will start being squeezed from the economy.
The legislation will have broad economic impacts, but also significant, and uneven, effects on particular industries and parts of the country, which has already sparked discontent.
Refiners, for instance, complain they are unfairly discriminated against compared to utilities.
Another controversy is how to allocate emissions permits. Currently, roughly half will be provided to regulated industries free, half will be auctioned.
The billions raised through the annual auctions called for in the legislation will be distributed to dozens of industries as transitional aid. Utilities, for instance, are slated to receive $307 billion through 2050. Oil and gas refiners are earmarked $54 billion.
Sen. Barbara Boxer recently amended the Warner-Lieberman bill to lower adjustment costs to business, while providing nearly $1.7 trillion in tax relief to consumers to cope with higher energy prices and promote energy efficiency.
“In our view she is trying to strike a balance between environmental integrity and yet building in lots of safeguards for industry and the economy,” Manik Roy, Pew Center for Global Climate Change. “This does feel like a step in the right direction.”
It is also just one step in a complicated dance that involves more than the U.S. Climate policy is not just a national problem, it is inherently global as well.
For supporters and opponents alike, a key issue is how aggressively to reduce emissions and whether to proceed before other major polluters, such as China and India, are also on-board.
“A ton of carbon emitted in Cincinnati or Columbus is the same ton of carbon emitted in Moscow or Beijing or wherever,” says Holbrook.
MSN Privacy . Legal © 2008 CNBC.com
What we need is “The America’s Climate Protection Amendment” to the US Constitution, whereby the government is specifically prohibited from making any law, regulation or executive order, or imposing any tax, for the purpose of changing or regulating the climate of the planet.
It’s the only way to preserve our natural liberties from the continuing and relentless onslaught of the climate nazis.
Even if such an amendment is politically impossible, a serious debate on its merits would do much to put the pro-global warming policy makers where they belong — which is on the defensive.
I call them “pro-global warming” because they cannot stand the thought that it might not be real. They will be grieving the loss of social engineering and power grabbing opportunites for the rest of their lives.
"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
Just as they did in the Amnesty Bill situation, conservative talk radio needs to start organizing all RW talk radio listeners to pressure Congress to defeat this insane bill.
So far, I have not heard Rush, Hannity, Savage, Ingraham etc. start such an effort.
Wonder if our "electing" these dims has any cause to this effect?@?
BOHICA.
I never trusted the Rats and I no longer trust any of the RINO’s either.
Congress never produced a drop of oil but they sure could undermine commerce, the main thing they actually have to aid and protect.
Go to americansolutions.com and sign the petition that Newt has started. Last check over 150,000 had signed it.
We should melt their f’ing phones, just like the last time.
There is a heavy ad campaign in our state to tell our Senators to vote yes to this bill.
It is going to raise gas prices even higher for a sham.
In my state with Lugar and Bayh, both will vote “yes”.
Bond, Grassley, Lugar. Boy, with leadership like this, we’re dead.
Yep, I sent Lugar a letter concerning leaks in our national security some time ago.
He sent me a nasty letter back telling me he was more concerned with the Valerie Plame issue.
I guess I won’t bother telling him to say no.
Washington is totally out of control. They have completely lost sight of their purpose, as defined by the founding fathers and the madate of present voters. This total insanity is exemplary of how dysfunctional they have become really since WW2.
This represents an EXCELLENT opportunity for McCain to campaign on the dysfunctional incompetence and power-mongering of Congress. Truman did it, and it worked.
At the same time, this country is in a world of hurt given the state of Congress.
Pity. Dick Lugar used to be somebody.
Yeah it has.
I've already had to cancel my 3 week vacation in August to ANWAR so I could bask, in my shorts, on the beach with a Margarita and watch the polar bears frolic and feel good about myself.
Instead I'll just have to take the trip to Mt. Rushmore again for the 15th time for I can afford the fuel to get there.
Well, at least I'll get to see the signs every mile telling me how far it is to Wall Drug again and go back to work refreshed and raring to produce.
I.E., new gas taxes.
Unfortunately it looks like McCain would support this type of legislation.
I’ve read two excellent books on climate & climate forecasting: “Unstoppable Global Warming, Every 1500 Years” & “The Satanic Gases.” I’ve been thinking of buying copies to mail to my senators. Maybe we should at least demand that they hold public hearings & interview some of the many ‘deniers’ before acting on this legislation.
Any minimally intelligent person knows that any “analysis” of the financial impact of Federal law is equivalent to “concluding” which will be the last leaf to fall from a tree. But hey, they're from the Federal government and their here to help us, excuse me.
ha - I got a “Server too busy” response - I hope by the end of the weekend they’ll have millions of signatures
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.