On Sunday, Senator John Kerry (D-MA) wrote in the Washington Post about the prospects of getting the climate bill passed this year - an election year.
"Conventional wisdom says that Congress ducks tough choices in election years," Kerry said, "predicting at best a watered-down energy bill. The same doubters said health reform was dead until we passed it. They forget that Congress passed the Clean Air Act in an election year."
Kerry said that the votes are there to overcome a Republican filibuster.
"Two Congresses ago, 38 senators voted for climate legislation. Last Congress, 54. There are 59 Senate Democrats. With several Republicans looking at the American Power Act with fresh eyes, 60 votes are achievable," he said.
This is year is different because, Kerry explained, because "industries that successfully opposed previous legislation stand with environmentalists behind this one. In part, that is because if Congress doesn't legislate, the Environmental Protection Agency will regulate carbon emissions under the Clean Air Act."
Kerry wrote about the "22 wasted years ago" when he and Al Gore held the first climate-change hearing. Now, he said, it's time to act.
"We're not waiting any longer; we can do it now."
--
Click the Subscribe button at the top of this page to stay abreast of the latest Energy Policy News.
Comments
Kerry:
"In part, that is because if Congress doesn't legislate, the Environmental Protection Agency will regulate carbon emissions under the Clean Air Act."
Congress created the EPA. Are they afraid of their own Frankenstein? Congress could stop the EPA from any mandate or regulation if they so desired.
As for the "22 wasted years ago", I will agree, having him and Algore around was wasted history.
From my vantage point, support for cap-and-trade as in the American Power Act has evaporated. When the House passed the cap-and-trade bill it was maybe 2-to-1 against cap-and-trade, opinion now is off the charts against it. This agrees with recent polls: 'attempting' to slow climate change with cap-and-trade is a low priority among Americans.
Frankly, I don't see Americans supporting cap-and-trade or any CO2 regulation until we have our own 'Climate Truth Commission.' ...and no longer rely upon the climate opinions of the United Nations. The UN is a biased political organization whose climate forecasts haven't proven prescient. The United States needs our own objective, transparent climate commission to think-through global warming.
-- Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA
@Rmoen I sort of agree with some of what say, but I disagree with the notion that a Congressional "Climate TRUTH Commission" would be any less political than the UN. The name itself is political.
I've interviewed many scientists here in the US, who don't work for the UN, and I've yet to find one of them that disagrees with the science supporting global climate change is caused by the burning of fossil fuels.
There are oil-industry-funded "scientists" who say it's all a hoax, as well as, Fox News.
But I can't help but wonder why scientists would dedicate their lives to a fraud. I mean, this would mean that these scientists all over the world are engaged in a wide-spread conspiracy, and to what end? To get the US Congress to raise taxes? Remember these are scientists all over the world.
I've yet to a shred of evidence that they're all conspiring with Al Gore to raise taxes. I fail to see the motive here for all these people to be a part of it - it's kind of silly.
Oh, so now the climate bill is KERRY'S? Hmmmmm . . .
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!