Debate Heating up on Clean Energy Bill

Insert photo caption or credit here

Debate Heating up on Clean Energy Bill

Debate is beginning to heat up in response to the proposed “American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009” (ACES).  This act is a comprehenisve energy bill that prescribes a number of measures that will promote U.S. energy independence and a more “eco” friendly stance by Washington.  Some of the strategies submitted in the bill include reducing the amount of carbon emissions 17% by 2020 through economic incentives to businesses such as the cap and trade system.

There are many debates circulating around Washington in regards to the efforts required to achieve the measures in ACES.  As with many energy reform debates, one of the main issues that has developed deals with economics.  One side argues that the bill will free America of overseas oil, and create a new sector of our economy that deals with the production of cleaner energies.  On the other hand, many in the business world say that this bill will put restraints on the free market and actually hinder businesses which will likely pass its costs onto consumers. 

The Committee on Energy and Commerce published this statement in March of 2009 promoting ACES.

"This legislation will create millions of clean energy jobs, put America on the path to energy independence, and cut global warming pollution. Our goal is to strengthen our economy by making America the world leader in new clean energy and energy efficiency technologies.  This legislation will create clean energy jobs that can't be shipped overseas, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and make America the global leader in energy technology. We will create jobs by the millions, save money by the billions, and unleash energy investment by the trillions,"

Today, American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Jack Gerard issued this in a statement to the hill blog;

“The Waxman-Markey bill has laudable environmental and economic goals but its inequitable system of allocations would have a disproportionate adverse impact on American consumers, businesses and producers of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, crude oil and natural gas."
Read his full statement here.

As this proposed bill reaches the debate stages in the house (likely to be in June), more arguments will be seen on both sides of this issue.  What do you think?  I encourage readers to review some of the information presented on the links in this article and discuss some of their insights into this important but highly debated bill. 
Feel free to comment.