Drilling For Votes: Senators Stake Out Climate And Energy Stances 1
From the Wonk Room.
Senators are beginning to seriously tackle climate and clean energy reform, responding to the leadership of Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) with letters staking out positions and making specific demands. Here’s an overview of these letters:
- The Udall Group: Twenty-two Senators Say Senate Should ‘Consider’ Climate Legislation ‘This Year’.
- Led by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM), a moderate bloc of twenty-two Democratic senators “believe the United States should consider bipartisan and comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation this year with a renewed focus on jobs and reduced dependence on foreign oil.” Critically, eleven of the signatories last year signed on to a Republican filibuster threat of green economy legislation, and seven are members of Sen. Evan Bayh’s (D-IN) Moderate Democrats Working Group . Bayh himself did not sign Udall’s letter.
Download the Udall Group letter. Signatories: Begich (D-AK), Bennet (D-CO), Brown (D-OH), Burris (D-IL), Cantwell (D-WA), Carper (D-DE), Casey (D-PA), Franken (D-MN), Hagan (D-NC), Harkin (D-IA), Kaufman (D-DE), Klobuchar (D-MN), Merkley (D-OR), Murray (D-WA), Shaheen (D-NH), Specter (D-PA), Stabenow (D-MI), Tester (D-MT), Udall (D-NM), Udall (D-CO), Warner (D-VA), and Wyden (D-OR).
- The Nuke Group: A Bipartisan Group Of Eleven Senators Demand A Nuclear Energy Summit.
- Five Democrats and six Republicans, from Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) to Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), propose the White House hold a “nuclear energy summit” on the “development of a 50-year strategy” within “the next 3-4 months,” because “safe nuclear power must play an increasingly important role in meeting our rising energy demand and ensuring cleaner air.” They want Energy Secretary Steven Chu, EPA Adminstrator Lisa Jackson, NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, and Bill Gates to attend.
Download the Nuke Group letter. Signatories: Carper (D-DE), Landrieu (D-LA), Klobuchar (D-MN), Webb (D-VA), Warner (D-VA), Voinovich (R-OH), Crapo (R-ID), Vitter (R-LA), Sessions (R-AL), Alexander (R-TN) and Inhofe (R-OK).
- Coastal State Senators: Don’t Drill On Me.
- In a letter to Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman, ten Democratic senators from coastal states – Florida, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Maryland, Oregon, and Ted Kaufman of Delaware – write that “our states are literally the front lines when it comes to the severe impacts we’ll see from sea level rise and stronger storms,” and express their concerns that “some interests are aggressively pursuing an effort to open the nation’s coasts and oceans for unfettered access to oil and gas drilling.” They reject “the concept of sharing revenue with states,” as “funds that belong to the American people should be shared equally and prioritized to reduce the federal deficit and to protect our oceans and coasts that provide this resource.” They call for use-it-or-lose-it language on oil leases. Increased offshore drilling won’t reduce the cost of gas, they recognize, saying “the only way for us to lower oil prices is to pursue and aggressive policy of energy efficiency and conservation.”
Download the Coastal Senators letter. Signatories: Nelson (D-FL), Menendez (D-NJ), Lautenberg (D-NJ), Reed (D-RI), Whitehouse (D-RI), Cardin (D-MD), Mikulski (D-MD), Merkley (D-OR), Wyden (D-OR), and Kaufman (D-DE).
- Feinstein Drills Into Policy Details.
- In a letter to Kerry, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) touches on several specific policy details for his “bipartisan legislation to address the pressing problem of climate change.” She wants heavy industry to be exempted from the initial cap, opposes pre-emption of California’s tailpipe emissions standards, supports the Waxman-Markey formula for electric utility permit giveaways, wants new offshore drilling to require state-level legislation, thanks Kerry for including the Snowe-Feinstein market oversight language, and wants the oil carbon fee to be indexed to an emissions target rather than a carbon market. Significantly, Feinstein recommends that “the legislation’s spending authorizations expire no later than ten years after enactment”—a major change from the forty-year permit allocation formulas in previous legislation.
Download Feinstein’s letter.
- Begich: ‘Alaska Is Ground Zero For Climate Change,’ So Let’s Drill It.
- Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) penned a letter saying “Alaska is ground zero for climate change. We are feeling its near-term effects far more than the residents of any other state, including retreating sea ice, rapidly eroding shorelines, thawing permafrost, ocean acidification, and changing fish and wildlife migration patterns.” Despite this, Begich calls for “greater emphasis and expanded incentives for natural gas” and “sharing in revenue from oil and gas development” from federal waters off the Arctic coast. Citing the “billions of dollars” of “damage to Alaska public infrastructure alone due to climate change,” Begich also requests “a higher priority for domestic rather than international adaptation funding” and an increased investment in Arctic research.
However, Begich does not call for stronger emissions reduction targets, stronger renewable or efficiency standards, stronger investments in green technologies, or anything that would allow the United States to lead an international agreement to halt greenhouse gas pollution.
Download Begich’s letter.
Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman have been holding a marathon of meetings. On Thursday they met with representatives of oil majors Shell, BP America, and ConocoPhillips, yet again with the pollution lobbyists of the Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth, and also with Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and later with members of the electric utility trade group Edison Electric Institute.
None of these senators’ letters call for stronger pollution reductions, stronger renewable or efficiency standards, stronger scientific review, stronger regulation of hydraulic fracturing, stronger action on coal ash waste, stronger mercury rules, an end to mountaintop removal, or greater auctions of pollution permits.
Putting a Predictable Price on Carbon: Opportunities for Bipartisan Agreement
- Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
- Senator Susan Collins (R-ME)
- Steve Kline, Vice President, Corporate Environmental and Federal Affairs, PG&E
- Mike Parr, Senior Manager, Federal Affairs, Dupont
- Michael Schnitzer, Economic Policy Advisor, Entergy (Northbridge Group)
- Amit Ronen, Deputy Chief of Staff, Senator Cantwell
- Jason Grumet, President, The Bipartisan Policy Center
Senate Watch: Baucus, Boxer, Conrad, Kerry, Feinstein, Graham, Klobuchar, Lieberman, Murkowski, Reid, Mark Udall, Voinovich
The Hill If it’s a viable bill, we’ll have a markup.
Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Senate Environment & Public Works ChairmanNational Journal I just want to see the bill when it’s written. I’d be foolhardy to get more specific.
Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)E&E News In general terms, they give a lot of power to the states on that [offshore drilling]. It seems to me what they’re doing is they’re taking the best ideas that have appeared over the years.
Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)E&E News I’m kind of waiting to see what happens. But if it looks like we’re not going to advance on the broader bill, I think it’s critically important that we at least have legislation to reduce dependence on foreign energy. I just think it’s critically important to the economy, critically important to our energy and economic future, and that can be done in a way that it’s harmonized with reducing our carbon footprint as well.
Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)E&E News On such a substantial decision about the future of a state [offshore drilling], a decision should be made by both the legislature and the governor. The state should also have the power to review its decision on a regular basis.
E&E News I’m still committed to trying to roll out a vision of how you can price carbon and make it business-friendly. We’re still going to do that. ... But the truth of the matter is, I think you’re going to find most of our colleagues around here risk adverse.
E&E News In the wake of health care’s passage, we have a strong case to make that this can be the next breakthrough legislative fight. Many senators who want to see a comprehensive energy and climate bill passed have been consumed with the drive to get health care passed. The same was rightfully true of the White House even as they kept the coals warm on energy and climate. Now they can pour their energy and attention into climate and energy. And here I think we can put the pieces of real bipartisanship back together.
E&E News We have a lot of work to do in the next 48 hours.
The Hill This will be the first time that we have sort of gone through an overall sense of where we think we are right now, but it is not cast in stone yet either. We expect in the next days to kind of really close in on some concepts, but we have a lot of meetings going on right now.
Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)National Journal He [Sen. Reid] has said repeatedly that we are going to do the combination of climate and energy. I don’t think he’s ever varied from that.
Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)E&E News We’re going to have to see language on this, but clearly there was interest in the bill and moving along. People hadn’t staked out ground against it. They were very open to it.
Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)E&E News We’d like to go to drafting over the break… let us know if they have specific parts of what we’re describing that they want to respond to.
Harry Reid (D-Nev.)E&E News It’s [the mood on Capitol Hill] no different than it was last week. It was bad last week. It’s going to be bad this week. Who knows what it’s going to be like next week?
E&E News I’ve got lots of options on energy. And I’m going to try to work it through with Bingaman and Kerry.
Mark Udall (D-Colo.)E&E News Clean natural gas projects like this will help us use this clean energy source to strengthen our economy while protecting Nevada’s great outdoors.
George Voinovich (R-Ohio)E&E News It’s reasonable to protect proprietary information of individual companies. That said, the public has many questions about fracturing technology’s impacts on the environment, and we need to make sure their reasonable questions and concerns are answered.
E&E News It [the KGL draft] raises a lot of questions. I want to keep working on the answers.
Sen. Levin Outlines Demands In "Dear John" Letter On Climate
In a letter to Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) outlined his policy priorities for the comprehensive climate legislation Sen. Kerry is authoring. Levin’s letter highlights “some of the points I made at the March 2 meeting on climate legislation” :
- Eliminate California waiver for automotive emissions
- Pre-empt EPA from Clean Air Act regulation of stationary sources
- A “realistic and firm” price collar
- A “delay of at least 10 years in regulation of industrial sources”
- “Sufficient” allowances for industrial sources
- Trade provisions “to assure a level playing field”
- A “100% emissions-based distribution formula” for permits to electricity generation
Although Levin’s language is unclear, the “delay of at least 10 years in regulation of industrial sources” appears to refer to individual site performance standards, not a decade-long delay in including industrial polluters under a market-based cap.
Giving allowances away to polluters for free based on their historic emissions, or “grandfathering,” says Environment America, “rewards owners of highly polluting facilities and discourages innovation.” Europe’s grandfathered cap-and-trade system generated $100 billion in windfall profits before they moved to an auctioned-credit system.
The liberal organization MoveOn is strongly opposed to pre-emption of the Clean Air Act in climate legislation.
Full text of the letter below:
March 5, 2010The Honorable John Kerry
Chairman
Committee on Foreign Relations
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510Dear John:
I am writing to reiterate some of the points I made at the March 2 meeting on climate legislation:
- A binding national standard for greenhouse gas emissions from mobile sources is needed, with clear pre-emption of states adopting a different standard. The rules for greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources should be set by Congress, superseding EPA’s existing statutory authority under the Clean Air Act.
- A realistic and firm “price collar” is needed to ensure that businesses and consumers do not face excessive costs and to provide more certainty for businesses to invest in the new clean energy economy.
- A delay of at least 10 years in regulation of industrial sources is needed, with a further delay provided for if important trade provisions to assure a level playing field are not included and fully implemented. Sufficient allowances for industrial sources are needed to cover both direct and indirect emissions. This is critical for ensuring that cost disparities relative to greenhouse gas controls do not erode our international competitiveness.
- Any approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions needs to take into account the differences in the source of electricity generation across the country, in order to avoid regional disparities. An allocation formula based 50 percent on emissions and 50 percent on sales would result in some states bearing an unfair and disproportionate share of the costs. As can be seen in the attached table, a 50-50 allocation would result in a wide disparity in the extent to which emission allowance needs are met, with a difference across states of 47%. A 100% emissions-based distribution formula is a more equitable approach (but there still is a difference across states of 22%). An adequate total number of allowances to the electricity sector is also needed to ensure a realistic and smooth transition to lower carbon-intensive electricity production.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin
AARP Endorses Cantwell-Collins
The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) has endorsed the Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal (CLEAR) Act (S. 2877), co-sponsored by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). In a letter sent to the senators, AARP Executive Vice President for Social Impact Nancy LeaMond embraced the CLEAR Act’s program of monthly rebate checks to all Americans paid for by a full auction of crabon credits.
The letter has some logical inconsistencies, claiming that AARP does not “advocate for any specific targets or structure for reducing carbon emissions and allocating emissions credits” but later stating that CLEAR’s “federal auction of 100% of emissions credits” is one of the features “essential to helping residential consumers transition to a clean energy economy.”
AARP has no official position on the existence of man-made climate change (“we do not take positions on the scientific issues underlying the debate on global warming”).
Full text of letter below:
March 9, 2010Dear Senators Cantwell and Collins:
On behalf of AARP and its 39 million members, I want to thank you for introducing S. 2877, the Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal (CLEAR) Act, and for you continuing leadership on behalf of America’s consumers in the Senate debate over energy independence and climate change. Your CLEAR Act legislation offers a thoughtful, bipartisan approach to reducing harmful carbon dioxide emissions while also mitigating potential energy cost increases to consumers.
AARP approaches the issue of climate change from a somewhat unique perspective. As we are not an environmental advocacy organization, we do not take positions on the scientific issues underlying the debate on global warming, nor do we advocate for any specific targets or structure for reducing carbon emissions and allocating emissions credits among power generators and local utilities. Our primary interest is protecting consumers from having to pay a disproportionate or excessive share of the cost of any approach Congress determines will best limit carbon emissions and encourage alternative electric generation.
Our expertise in this area derives from our advocacy on behalf of consumers in state utility regulatory proceedings and our understanding of the complexities of state utilities regulation. For more than 20 years, AARP has been the only national organization consistently working at the federal level and in the states to advance energy affordability and consumer protections from unfair utility policies and rate increases. Last year alone, our national and state office staff engaged in legislative and regulatory efforts in 30 states that resulted in nearly $120 million in documented savings for consumeres.
The CLEAR Act offers a uniquely pro-consumer approach for addressing climate change on an economy-wide basis. It proposes a federal auction of 100% of emissions credits, with the proceeds from 75% of these credits reserved for direct assistance to consumers in monthly cash rebates. It seeks to mitigate indirect costs that are routinely passed on to consumers by imposing a price collar on the price for emission credits to prevent price spikes and promote energy price stability, while also prohibiting trading of emissions credits to avoid what analysts estimate could become a trillion dollar trading market for carbon credits. It establishes an energy efficiency rebate loan program to help consumers finance home energy efficiency improvements. In addition, the CLEAR Act proposes to use part of the proceeds from the remaining 25% of credits for additional assistance to low-income consumers, recognizing that low- and fixed-income households routinely spend a far larger proportion of their monthly incomes on utilities. And it authorizes and funds a Consumer Advocate Office to provide a truly independent voice for consumers in regulatory proceedings before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
AARP strongly supports these features of your legislation as essential to helping residential consumers transition to a clean energy economy, and protecting them from having to bear an unfair share of the cost. We look forward to working with you to highlight the innoveative and important features of your legislation and to ensure that they are included in any final climate change legislation.
Thank you again for your continued leadership on this and other issues that are of critical importance to older Americans. Please feel free to call on me, or have your staff call Marti T. Doneghy, Senior Legislative Representative in our Office of Government Relations and Advocacy at (202) 434-3804 or contact her at [email protected] if we can provide you with any information or assistance.
Sincerely,
Nancy LeaMond Executive Vice President for Social Impact AARP
Senate Watch: Baucus, Begich, Brown, Cardin, Graham, Gregg, Landrieu, Lieberman, McCain, Murkowski
Mark Begich (D-Alaska)E&E News For this bill [green tax extenders], most of the activity is behind us. This bill reached its stride. We see the finish line ahead on Tuesday or so, and we expect a final push then.
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)E&E News I felt I got a lot [from K-G-L] of what I needed, understanding the timetable and the schedule, and what sources will be regulated first, which won’t be.
Ben Cardin (D-Md.)E&E News We want this bill to work for jobs. It’s ultimately an energy independence, jobs and environmental bill together. We don’t have details yet, but we’re making progress.
Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)E&E News There’s the potential for a broader coalition supporting this.
E&E News Offshore drilling and energy independence is essential to any bill I would support. There’s a way to drill for oil and gas offshore that will really lead to energy independence.
E&E News I think he’s [Kerry] trying to approach this in a creative way and I’m listening. It’s better than where they started.
Mary Landrieu (D-La) http://www.eenews.net/EEDaily/2010/03/09/3/ They [Kerry, Graham, Lieberman] are all on the same page as I am that partnership with the states needs to be established. The idea would be to open as much of the coast of the United States as possible and have appropriate revenue sharing levels, and we have to negotiate a lot of that.
Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)John McCain (R-Ariz.)E&E News We’re going to have to go outside of our comfort zone. That’s how it’s going to get done.
Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)E&E News You know I’m always deeply disturbed about the fact there’s no meaningful nuclear power component.
E&E News I’m saying that you want to have me sit down at the table and talk about what a strong domestic production piece is, you have to be willing to talk to me about ANWR. Pretty simple… It’s kind of like feeling the elephant when you’ve got the blindfold on. The trunk feels entirely different than the tail and the leg. And right now, we’re just feeling maybe the trunk, and I want to know what the leg looks like and what the tail looks like.
State Legislatures Work To Deny Regulation of Climate Threat
Yesterday, the South Dakota legislature passed a resolution telling public schools to teach “balance” about the “prejudiced” science of climate change by a vote of 37-33. Earlier language that ascribed “astrological” influences to global warming was stripped from the final version.
There are at least fifteen state legislatures attempting to prevent limits on greenhouse gas pollution. The states of Alabama and global warming endangerment finding, with legislators in thirteen more states in tow. Several of these resolutions argue that the scientific consensus on the threat of manmade global warming is actually a conspiracy:KENTUCKY: “WHEREAS, a recent disclosure of communications among scientists associated with the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia has cast serious doubt upon the scientific data that have purportedly supported the finding that manmade carbon dioxide has been a material cause of global warming or global climate change . . .”MARYLAND: “WHEREAS, E–mail and other communications between climate researchers around the globe discovered as part of the recent “climate–gate” controversy indicate that there is a well–organized and ongoing effort to manipulate global temperature data and incorporate tricks to substantiate the theory of climate change . . . “
OKLAHOMA: “WHEREAS, intense public scrutiny has revealed how unsettled the science is on climate change and the unwillingness of many of the world’s climatologists to share data or even entertain opposing viewpoints on the subject . . .”
UTAH: “WHEREAS, emails and other communications between climate researchers around the globe, referred to as ‘Climategate,’ indicate a well organized and ongoing effort to manipulate global temperature data in order to produce a global warming outcome . . .”
Every resolution makes the claim that protecting citizens from hazardous climate pollution would hurt the economy, instead of spurring a green recovery. Missouri, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Alaska lawmakers talk about being “dependent” on their states’ coal and oil industries. Several of the resolutions, drafted early last year, call on Congress to reject the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), which passed the House of Representatives in June but has languished in the Senate. The Alaska and West Virginia resolutions support Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) effort to rewrite the Clean Air Act (S.J.Res. 26), and Alabama’s resolution calls for the passage of Rep. Earl Pomeroy’s (D-ND) similar effort (H.R. 4396).
Bizarrely, Arizona state senator Sylvia Allen’s (R-AZ) resolution argues that the U.S. Congress does not have the Constitutional authority to regulate greenhouse gas pollution. Allen also believes the Earth is 6000 years old. The other Arizona resolution, along with the Kentucky, Virginia, and Washington resolutions, would attempt to block state enforcement of global warming rules.
These efforts to overturn the Clean Air Act and politicize established science are being supported by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a national organization that brings conservative state lawmakers together with industry. ALEC promotes a resolution opposing the endangerment finding drafted by its Natural Resources Task Force, which includes over 120 lawmakers from around the nation and a similarly sized group of corporate representatives. Although ALEC does not have an official position on the validity of climate science, the organization is “actively involved in helping people get together and share ideas,” a representative told Hill Heat. For example, the spring ALEC task force meeting will feature noted climate conspiracy theorist Paul Driessen, the author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death.
| States With Resolutions Opposing Greenhouse Endangerment Finding | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| State | Bill | Sponsor | Status | Notes |
| AK | HJR 49 | Stoltze ( R) | Pending | Supports Murkowski |
| AL | HJR 218 | Gipson ( R) | Enacted | Supports Pomeroy |
| AZ | HB 2442 SCR 1050 | Burges ( R) Allen ( R) | Pending | Blocks state enforcement Tenther resolution |
| FL | HR 1357 SR 958 | Stephens ( R) Pearson ( R) | Pending | Supports overturn |
| IL | HR 961 SR 666 | Phelps (D) Forby ( D) | Pending | Opposes Waxman-Markey |
| KS | SR 1809 | Natural Resources Committee | Pending | Opposes “administrative fiat” by EPA |
| KY | HJR 20 | Fischer ( R) | Pending | Cites hacked emails to block state enforcement |
| MD | HJR 13 | Jenkins ( R) | Pending | Cites “climate change conspiracy” to oppose EPA |
| MO | HCR 46 HCR 59 | Funderburk ( R) Brown ( R) | Pending | Opposes Waxman-Markey, EPA |
| OK | SCR 41 | Lamb ( R) | Adopted by Senate | Cites “unsettled” science to support overturn |
| UT | EPA withdrawal | |||
| VA | HB1357 | Morefield ( R) | Pending | “Carbon dioxide shall not be considered air pollution” |
| WA | S 6477 | Stevens ( R) | Pending | Blocks state enforcement |
| WV | HCR 34 | Shott ( R) | Pending | Cites “vigorous, legitimate, and substantive” scientific debate to support Murkowski |
Senate Watch: Bingaman, Boxer, Cardin, Casey, Corker, Dorgan, Graham, Kerry, Landrieu, Lincoln, Murkowski, Nelson, Reid, Sanders, Snowe 1
Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)E&E News If enacted today, CEDA can create countless new jobs this year in new companies across the country by helping breakthrough clean energy technologies get introduced into U.S. markets and expanded as quickly as possible. CEDA would facilitate tens of billions of dollars in new investment in entrepreneurial companies with innovative technologies by giving investors the confidence that financing will be available later for first commercial-scale deployment. This is critical in helping emerging clean tech companies grow in an environment that is highly capital intensive, making our economy more competitive, and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.
Ben Cardin (D-Md.)E&E News This is a new low, in my humble opinion. [The resolution is an] unprecedented move by a United States senator and her co-sponsors to overturn a health finding made by health experts and scientific experts in order to stand with the special interests. We know we’ve got to find 60 votes, but we also know we cannot and must not repeal a scientific health finding.
Robert Casey (D-Penn.)E&E News There are provisions that are more difficult for us to accept if they’re not part of a comprehensive bill. In a broader package I am more understanding of some of the other regional concerns.
Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)E&E Neews It’s going to be very hard to do something on that [climate] in the next weeks and months. And after that, I can’t tell. But we have to have substantive strategies on job creation.
Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.)E&E News You’re [Secretary Chu] slow-walking things that are proven, and wanting to spend lots of money on things that are unproven. It makes me less trustful of the department.
E&E News It [the energy committee bill] will move us in the direction of a lower-carbon future. Offshore drilling is a carrot. It’s a carrot that’s already been consumed.
Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)E&E News My guess is that it probably wouldn’t meet with favor when it hits the White House, if it ever passes the House and the Senate.
E&E News I can get every Republican for an energy independence bill, OK? But there are not 60 votes. You’re not going to get the nuclear power provisions you want unless you do something on emission controls.
E&E News I’ve got a lot of Republicans who are really excited about the energy part. What I’m telling them, and what I’m telling y’all, if you want energy independence, the way to get there is through cleaning up the air, and we’ll see what happens.
John Kerry (D-Mass.)E&E News If you vote to pre-empt the EPA, which I’m willing to do, I think there’s a burden on you as a U.S. senator to deal with the issue.
E&E News It’s [the Murkowski resolution] not going to affect what we’re doing one way or another.
Mary Landrieu (D-La.)E&E News We certainly had a good discussion on the issue [with the White House]. And I think they’re committed to moving forward, as are we. We’re already working on text,” Kerry said. “We’re putting a bill together. ... If you give us just a few days here, we’ll be ready to give you a little update. We feel very good about where we are.
E&E News The industries that I represent want the sharpest, most carefully crafted tools available, and I don’t think that can be achieved using a Clean Air Act that wasn’t designed for that purpose.
Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)E&E News I am very concerned about the burden that EPA regulation of carbon emissions could put on our economy and have questions about the actual benefit EPA regulations would have on the environment. Heavy-handed EPA regulation, as well as the current cap-and-trade bills in Congress, will cost us jobs and put us at an even greater competitive disadvantage to China, India and others.
E&E News The decision to offer this resolution was brought about by what will happen in the wake of the EPA’s decision to issue the endangerment finding,. You see, it is not merely a ‘finding.’ It’s actually a floodgate, and under the guise of protecting the environment, it’s set to unleash a wave of damaging new regulations that will wash over and further submerge our struggling economy.
Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)E&E News Murkowski was unclear on the timing of a floor vote but said she would hold out hope on reaching a broader agreement on energy and climate change. “At this point in time, yes, that is what our plan is,” she said. “But I think we also need to be nimble. Things change around here. If there should be something groundbreaking that comes about with a proposal out there, I’m not going to foreclose the discussions.” She was optimistic that she would be able to get the support needed to clear the Senate. “I do believe we will have the 51 votes,” she said, but “I don’t have a cheat sheet today that says 51 votes.”
Harry Reid (D-Nev.)E&E News I think it’s a situation where the legislative branch needs to tell an alphabet agency that we don’t need them looking over our shoulder, critiquing whether we’re moving quickly enough for them.
Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)E&E News Regan Lachapelle, a spokeswoman for Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), also pushed back at the Murkowski amendment, including the prospect it would undercut the EPA’s auto regulations. She put the onus on Republicans for not being more open to agreement on a broader climate bill. “There is no disagreement that it would be better for Congress to pass bipartisan comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation that creates jobs, protects consumers, improves our energy security, and invests heavily in making our economy and businesses more efficient and globally competitive, than for EPA to move forward with command and control regulation of global warming pollution,” she said. “Unfortunately, thus far, very few Republicans have shown any willingness to work with us on that more constructive solution.”
Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)E&E News This country has put more money into nuclear fuel than any other fuel. I’d like to see volunteers, maybe Kentucky or Tennessee would volunteer, for places to store all that [nuclear] waste. I usually don’t see a lot of hands going up.
E&E News That’s [EPA regulation] a very serious step, frankly. I’ve expressed concerns, deep concerns, about that approach, absolutely.
Lincoln Cosponsors Murkowski Effort To Block Greenhouse Gas Regulation
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) announced today she is co-sponsoring Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-Alaska) resolution of disapproval to block regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, in a statement entitled “Lincoln Signs on to Resolution Blocking Heavy-Handed EPA Regulation” :
Washington – U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, issued the following statement today announcing her support for legislation to block efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. Lincoln agreed to cosponsor a resolution of disapproval to be introduced by Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska.“I am very concerned about the burden that EPA regulation of carbon emissions could put on our economy and have questions about the actual benefit EPA regulations would have on the environment. Heavy-handed EPA regulation, as well as the current cap and trade bills in Congress, will cost us jobs and put us at an even greater competitive disadvantage to China, India and others.
“We can make immediate gains to reduce carbon emissions by sending the President bipartisan clean energy legislation produced by the Senate Energy Committee. This legislation, coupled with energy tax incentives, will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and incentivize renewable energy, all while improving the environment and creating much-needed jobs.
“We must focus on cutting the deficit, creating jobs and getting the economy back on track. Arkansans, and the American public, want Congress to take a breath, slow down, and thoughtfully come up with energy policy that makes common sense and will help grow our economy.”
Senate Watch, Post-Copenhagen: Bennett, Bond, Casey, Durbin, Graham, Inhofe, Kaufman, Kerry, Levin, McCain, Murkowksi, Nelson, Rockefeller, Voinovich
Kit Bond (R-Mo.)E&E News I don’t think they got anything in Copenhagen that encourages anyone. Except Jim Inhofe.
Bob Casey (D-Penn.)E&E News on developing countries: They are going to continue to develop the energy they need. They’re not fools.
Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)Politico The reality for states like Pennsylvania is, even as we move forward with any kind of climate change legislation, there are going to be cost impacts. We want to make sure we’re not adding yet another cost impact that other countries don’t have to shoulder.
The Hill We’re going to move forward on it. I hope we can get it done this coming year.
Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)Politico We have a responsibility to deal with this issue. We have to acknowledge the obvious. China, one of our great competitors in the world, is taking the green leap forward, as they say. They are committing themselves to this new energy-efficient economy, and they are building companies even in the United States that will make those products. Will the United States stand by the sidelines or will we be part of this leap forward? I don’t want to lose those jobs.
The Hill I want to work with this administration, but this healthcare proposal has made it very hard for Republicans to sit down at the table with these guys, because of the way they have run over us. But at the end of the day we have more problems than just healthcare.
I want to help solve hard problems, but this healthcare bill has made a hard problem worse.
When [Venezuelan President] Hugo Chavez got a standing ovation in Copenhagen it made me sick to my stomach, but the only way he is relevant is because of the oil revenues.
I think in many ways it is going to be seen as ineffective, but it is some transparency that we don’t have today.
James Inhofe (R-Okla.)Politico If we don’t do it by then [pass legislation by spring], we’ll have a hard time doing it.
Ted Kaufman (D-Del.)E&E News Speed things along? You’ve got to be kidding me, surely you jest. ... Nothing was done, another total failure, just like all the rest of them.
John Kerry (D-Mass.)Politico If China will not let us verify, we’re going to have a heck of a time here. An agreement’s no good if you can’t verify.
Politico Clearly, senators and congressmen were not going to do something if other people are not going to do something — so that’s a start. There’s still going to be people who resist, there’s still going to be naysayers, there’s still going to be people who doubt the science.
E&E News Now the proof will be in our willingness to do some things we need to do, and assuming we step up, I think that’s going to set an example to a lot of other countries. I think you had to have some deal where the major emitters are beginning to reduce. Having China at the table was the most critical thing because most of our colleagues are saying, ‘Well what about China? What about China? If they don’t do it, it won’t make any difference.’ The less developed countries, the truly less developed countries barely emit. And so we have some time to work with them to bring them to the table.
John McCain (R-Ariz.)E&E News Unless India and China are bound and we know what the details are—I don’t think necessarily that their agreeing to goals or whatever it was they agreed to will have an effect on cap and trade. If there was a binding agreement that tied them into limits that were meaningful, then I think that would have advanced the legislation. From what I understand of this, it’s more of agreeing to goals.
The Hill I think that the fact it has no binding provisions to it whatsoever is a rhetorical attempt to cover up what was obviously a serious failure.
Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)E&E News “It’s a nothingburger,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), adding that while he had not read the actual language that was slowly emerging from Copenhagen, he had been told by others not to expect much.
Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)E&E News Whenever you have developing countries, and certainly China and India stepping forward and indicating that they have a willingness to be a participant, I think that’s a strong indicator that we’ll have opportunities to be working and I think that that is progress.
Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)E&E News Look, I don’t succumb to international pressure. Honestly, I think it’s something that we need to work with other countries on, but I don’t expect other countries to pressure us. This is not the United States’ responsibility to please the world, secure the world, or enforce against the world with these kinds of requirements. We need to participate to the extent we can and to me that’s our role.
George Voinovich (R-Ohio)E&E News I think that the Chinese are perfectly capable of being on board for something and then not doing it.
E&E News I know for a fact that even though the government of China says they are committed to X and Y, the economy in China is run by the governors of the state. . . We know that if we commit to something, we will do it.