Senate GOP Blocks Climate Vote

[one...two...tree 2,762]

AP

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Republicans on Friday blocked a global warming bill that would have required major reductions in greenhouse gases, after a bitter debate over its economic costs and whether it would substantially raise gasoline and other energy prices.

Democratic leaders fell a dozen votes short of getting the 60 needed to end a Republican filibuster on the measure and bring the bill up for a vote. The 48-36 vote failed to reach even a majority, a disappointment to the bill's supporters. Majority Leader Harry Reid was expected to pull the legislation, in all likelihood pushing the congressional debate over climate change to next year with a new Congress and a new president.

The bill would have capped carbon dioxide coming from power plants, refineries and factories, with a target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 71 percent by mid-century.

"It's a huge tax increase," argued Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, a prominent coal-producing state. He maintained that the proposed system of allowing widespread trading of carbon emissions allowances would produce "the largest restructuring of the American economy since the New Deal."

Supporters of the bill accused Republicans of muddying the water with misinformation. "There is no tax increase," Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., one of the bill's chief sponsors said. She said the emissions trading system would provide tax relief to help people pay energy prices. And supporters disputed that it would substantially increase gasoline prices.

Four Democrats joined most Republicans in essentially killing the bill.

Both presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, were absent, although supporters of the bill said they had sent letters advising they would have voted for the bill.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/...1812340,00.html

[Tsup2 0]

This ill-conceived legislation was a back-door tax on American business. If we have a democratic President, House and Senate after the November elections they will increase the cost of doing business through regulation and taxation resulting in more jobs being outsourced or eliminated. Somebody has to pay for the billions of vote getting promises that Obama is making. Ultimately it will be the American taxpayer and consumer, which is all of us.

[GaryC 7]

The GOP shot it down? Get your facts straight.

Proponents Take Long Look At Climate Bill's Dem Skeptics

Tue. Jun 3, 2008

With an eye toward the 111th Congress, the Senate Monday took up global warming legislation opponents are expected to block but which is expected to help frame the debate next year and beyond.

Democrats and Republicans gave wide support, 74-14, to an initial procedural vote to limit debate on moving to the bill. The measure aims to reduce heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions from the United States by about 70 percent by midcentury.

Senate Majority Leader Reid has not indicated what the parameters of the global warming debate will be, although a Senate Democratic aide said Reid is expected to keep the bill on the floor until at least early next week.

While few expect the Senate to approve the measure this year, proponents are watching Democrats from heavy manufacturing and energy producing states to help determine how legislation might eventually pass Congress and get signed into law.

"The people to watch for are those who say 'yes, if' instead of 'no, because,'" said Tony Kreindler, a spokesman for Environment Defense Fund, a leading supporter of the bill among environmental activists. "Every speech I think is going to count."

Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said energy-intensive manufacturers from the domestic cement, glass, aluminum, steel and other industries need to be better protected in the bill against Chinese exports that can be made and imported cheaper because they are not subject to stringent environmental laws.

"When the Chinese or anyone else exports a product that they make in their country under very weak environmental rules, that there is no cost of the environment ... then there needs to be some equalization at the border," he said. "I'm not going to let them be put out of business because of some unfair trade advantage that China today enjoys."

So-called "border equalization" language already in the bill needs to be expanded and better enforced, said Brown, who is working on an amendment with some Republicans.

Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., who opposes the bill, said he is working on amendments to at least partially address the impact on U.S. manufacturers. "I'm worried about cap and trade and I'm worried about mandating technology within a time frame," Nelson said. "You've got to be sure that you can meet deadlines."

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said he will not support the bill at least until he sees a full analysis on how it would affect his state, where about 90 percent of electricity comes from coal. "I'm waiting to see how it's altered," he said. Other than ensuring that the coal industry can meet the bill's requirements, Conrad said other issues important to him include allowing enough agricultural activities to offset emission requirements and containing the overall cost of the measure.

Sen. John (Jay) Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said he is worried about how the bill affects his coal-rich state.

"The bill isn't going anywhere anyway; that's something you have to put in the back of your mind and I want more time and better faith from some of the principals in talking about my state of West Virginia," Rockefeller said.

While he did not go into specifics about possible amendments, Rockefeller said, "2012 isn't doable." He was referring to the first year the bill's cap-and-trade program would be implemented.

Fellow West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd was the only Democrat to vote against the motion Monday to proceed to the bill. Twelve senators did not vote, including any of the three presidential candidates.

Perhaps because few if any expect a cap-and-trade program to become law this year, moderate Democrats might not be under intense scrutiny to sign off on a bill. Brown said Senate Democratic leaders have not put any pressure on him.

Remarks Monday by those outspokenly for or against the measure -- including a veto threat by the White House -- have outlined what many expect to be a largely partisan public relations battle on whether the bill would hurt consumers by raising gas prices and otherwise impeding the economy.

"Gas prices are, without doubt, the single most pressing issue for Americans at the moment," Senate Minority Leader McConnell said on the floor. "And that's why it's so hard to comprehend the majority's decision to move to a bill -- at the start of the summer driving season -- that would raise the price of gas by as much as $1.40 a gallon, home electricity bills by about 44 percent, and natural gas prices by about 20 percent." He said the timing of the bill "could not be worse, and the substance is just as bad."

Environment and Public Works ranking member James Inhofe called it the "largest tax increase in the history of America," echoing a White House veto threat contained in a Statement of Administration Policy issued Monday.

Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer -- who is sponsoring the bill with Sens. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and John Warner, R-Va. -- said Republicans are spouting "misinformation and untruth," saying that the measure would give consumers about $800 billion in tax credits and would give another $911 billion to local utilities to pass on in rebates to their customers. "This is not a tax bill," Boxer said.

Lieberman said "the argument of the day against the bill" that it would raise gas prices "gets it exactly backward."

The bill, Lieberman said, will actually lower gasoline prices because it would reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil and invest in alternative fuels and other technologies. "This is the answer to the problem of gas prices," Lieberman said.

He then cited the Energy Information Administration in stating that gas prices would rise fewer than 2 cents per gallon annually. "The American people would be thrilled to have the price of gasoline raised only 2 cents a gallon per year," Lieberman said. "And the great news is they'd be particularly thrilled that that 2 cents would be an investment in a whole new set of ways to power their cars and trucks that will actually make the cost of gasoline less."

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdai...080603_3849.php

[Cassie 8]

This ill-conceived legislation was a back-door tax on American business. If we have a democratic President, House and Senate after the November elections they will increase the cost of doing business through regulation and taxation resulting in more jobs being outsourced or eliminated. Somebody has to pay for the billions of vote getting promises that Obama is making. Ultimately it will be the American taxpayer and consumer, which is all of us.

OR it will help the businesses already in place that design smokestack scrubbers and such, like the company my hubby works for. Ain't capitalism grand?