cap and trade passed...we are screwed!

[festus]

House passes climate change bill
By: Lisa Lerer and Patrick O'Connor
June 25, 2009 08:43 PM EST
House passes climate-change bill - Lisa Lerer and Patrick O'Connor - POLITICO.com
Democrats narrowly passed historic climate and energy legislation Friday evening that would transform the country’s economy and industrial landscape.

But the all-hands-on-deck effort to protect politically vulnerable Democrats by corralling the minimum number of votes to pass the bill, 219-212, proves that there are limits to President Barack Obama's ability to use his popularity to push through his legislative agenda. Forty-four Democrats voted against the bill, while just eight Republicans crossed the aisle to back it.

Despite the tough path to passage, the legislation is a significant win for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) and the bill’s two main sponsors – House Energy and Commerce committee chairman Henry Waxman (D-Ca.) and Massachusetts Rep. Edward Markey (D) – who modified the bill again and again to get skeptical members from the Rust Belt, the oil-producing southeast and rural Midwest to back the legislation.

“We passed transformational legislation which takes us into the future,” Pelosi said at a press conference following the vote, after she and other leaders took congratulatory phone calls from Obama, former Vice President Al Gore and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

“It has been an incredible six months, to go from a point where no one believed we could pass this legislation to a point now where we can begin to say that we are going to send president Obama to Copenhagen in December as the leader of the of the world on climate change,” said Markey, referring to world climate talks scheduled this winter.

After months of negotiations, 211 Democrats and eight Republicans voted for the bill of more than 1,200 pages, setting the legislation on a path towards the Senate. There, it faces a far more uncertain future given the opposition of key moderates and the already-heated battle over health care.

Republicans are sure to try and use against other Democrats in 2010, with accusations that they raised electricity bills for already-strapped consumers in the midst of a deep recession.

Indeed, the National Republican Congressional Committee wasted little time before blasting out a press release targeting more than two dozen Democrats for supporting “Democrats’ ongoing crusade against economic recovery.”

“I’m in a tough spot. I really am,” Rep. John Salazar (D-Colo.), one of the Democrats who opposed the bill, said before the vote, citing his fears the legislation could raise energy costs and hurt the coal industry in his low-income, rural district.

“Either way I’m going to get creamed.”

Democratic leadership attempted to protect their most vulnerable freshman by cajoling yes votes from more senior members such as Lloyd Doggett of Texas.

Doggett announced his change of heart from “strong objection” earlier in the day during the final stage of the floor debate.

Doggett told POLITICO that he made his switch after speaking to Obama and having lengthy conversations with Waxman, Markey, Gore and Pelosi, but ultimately, he decided to support the bill so he could have a seat at the negotiating table when California Sen. Barbara Boxer introduces it in the Senate later this summer.

“It has been a difficult and significant decision,” Doggett said. “I just decided that I will have a better chance to make changes later in the process if I acted in good faith now. But don't think this means I'm signing off on the conference report,” he said.

When the bill passed, the chamber erupted in applause, and colleagues shook Markey and Waxman's hands. Even some Republicans clapped, mocking the Democrats for casting what they deemed a politically unpopular vote.

The vote itself proceeded with much less drama than hung in the chamber for most of the day leading up to the much anticipated roll call; Democrats looked relieved and Republicans resigned as they watched votes register on the big board above the House floor. Fence-sitting Republicans such as Washington Rep. Dave Reichert and New Jersey Rep. Leonard Lance waited to vote “yes” on the bill, in a game of chicken with moderate Democrats.

Many of those moderate Democrats, like freshman Rep. Bobby Bright of Alabama, also waited until the end of the roll call to cast votes against the package.


In the end, Democrats had the votes they needed, and many veteran moderates were able to cast votes in favor of the bill without hanging junior Democrats out to dry. One possible exception – Maryland Rep. Frank Kratovil, a freshman – accepted handshakes from colleagues after casting an early vote in favor of the package.

The debate leading up to the vote was nevertheless intense.

Democrats touted the legislation as a measure that would improve national security, create jobs, protect the environment and reestablish the United States as a world leader. Republicans slammed the bill as an economic catastrophe.

“I look forward to spending the next 100 years trying to fix this legislation,” said California Republican Brian Bilbray.

“This is the biggest job killing bill that’s ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives. Right here, this bill,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner. “And I don’t think that’s what the American people want.”

Donning reading glasses, Boehner then delayed the roll call vote by reading page-by-page through a 300-page managers’ amendment Democrats added at around 3 a.m. on Friday. Boehner seemed to relish the hour-long stunt, picking out the bill’s most obscure language and then pontificating about what it might – or might not – mean. Republicans laughed along with him and roared with applause when he was done.

The complex bill mandates a 17-percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and a 83-percent cut by 2050, reductions that will be accomplished by putting a price on carbon dioxide through a cap-and-trade system. It mandates that 20 percent of electricity comes from renewable sources and increased energy efficiency by 2020. And the legislation gives electric utilities, coal plants, energy-intensive manufacturers, farmers, petroleum refiners, and other industries special protections to help them transition to new, less-fossil fuel-intensive ways of doing business.

It will also raise electricity prices for consumers by $175 a year per household by 2020, according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office, significantly less than the $3,000 price hike predicted by Republicans who say the “energy tax” will increase energy bills and the cost of consumer goods.

Obama praised the House for taking a “bold and necessary step,” then wasted no time in turning up the heat on the upper chamber. “Now it's up to the Senate to take the next step. And I'm confident that in the coming weeks and months the Senate will demonstrate the same commitment to addressing what is a tremendous challenge and an extraordinary opportunity,” he said in a statement.

The White House played a significant role in drumming up support for the legislation, which is a key piece of the administration’s first-year agenda. The administration is under pressure to make significant progress towards cutting greenhouse gas emissions before the Copenhagen international climate talks next December.

A long list of Cabinet secretaries, key staffers and even Obama himself lobbied undecided members. Gore, the don of the climate-change world, spent several days calling on the fence lawmakers.

The legislation spilt both the environmental and business communities. Although environmentalists have pushed for stricter controls on greenhouse-gas emissions for more than a decade, more left-wing groups like Greenpeace wanted stronger emissions reductions and fewer protections for greenhouse-gas guzzling industries like coal. While some electric utilities, auto manufacturers, and Fortune 500 companies supported the bill, large business associations like the Chamber of Commerce argued that it would impose a crippling regulatory burden on the economy that would push factories and jobs abroad.

The House chamber took on the feeling of a momentous vote on Friday, with lobbyists, administration officials and even the stray senator –in this case, Udall – working the hallways off the floor to convince fence sitters in one direction or another. After the rule vote, Markey quickly collared Holt for a brief conversation.

“We are fond of seeing headlines that say this is the Democrats’ toughest challenge yet,” said House Whip James Clyburn, tweaking the media’s hyperbole. “Well, today that what quite true.”

He joined many other Democrats in giving the ultimate credit to Pelosi making the difference on the vote.
“Nancy Pelosi was the whip on this,” he said.

-- Victoria McGrane contributed to this story.

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

[Wolfling68]

cost??? How about the governments absolute control over what businesses get to survive? If the governenment doesn't like the business, they will just not give them carbon credits, which, of course, will be a fortune on the market........Don't like the competition, bribe, errr...lobby for yor competition to not get any credits this year......we are sooo screwed.

[HK4U]

Another nail in the coffen by the Marxists in office.

[matthewaynelson]

Hey, strongly urge y'all to shout at your Senators! Let them know your thoughts on Cap-and-Trade!

I emalied my Florida and Texas Rep's... my message included below... PLEASE email your Rep's too, let your thoughts about this matter be heard in Washington!

____________________
I'm writing regarding the cap-and-trade legislation (known as Waxman-Markey) that is currently being forced through the House by Speaker Pelosi. Cap-and-trade is a bad piece of legislation for the United States. There have already been 33 Senators who on March 12 voiced their concern regarding this legislation and rejected the idea of forcing a speedy approval.

The whole point of cap-and-trade is to hike the price of electricity and gas so that Americans will use less. These higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills or at the gas station but in every manufactured good, from food to cars. Consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created (or higher unemployment). Some companies will instead move their operations overseas, with the same result.

The US economy and unemployment numbers are bad enough under the weight of this current administration’s bad decisions without adding a destructive piece of legislation like cap-and-trade to make matters worse. The Heritage Foundation did an analysis of Waxman-Markey, broadly comparing the economy with and without the carbon tax. Under this more comprehensive scenario, it found Waxman-Markey would cost the economy $161 billion in 2020, which is $1,870 per year for a family of four. As the bill's restrictions kick in, that number rises to $6,800 per year for a family of four by 2035.

AMERICANS DO NOT NEED ANY MORE TAXES!

The proponents of this misguided legislation claim these figures generated by the Heritage analysis are too high. The CBO has even suggested lower estimates based on an incomplete data and unrealistic variables. The reality is that cost estimates for climate legislation are as unreliable as the models predicting climate change. What comes out of the computer is a function of what is typed in and who is interpreting the data. A better indicator might be what other countries are already experiencing. Britain's Taxpayer Alliance estimates the average family there is paying nearly $1,300 a year in green taxes for carbon-cutting programs in effect only a few years.

Please protect Americans from increased taxes! Please say no to legislation built on bad science! Please fight the destructive tendencies of some in American leadership who seemingly won’t be satisfied until the US economy is dead and lifeless.

I strongly urge you to REJECT cap-and-trade (Waxman-Markey).

[fuhr52]

Obama stated in his campaign speeches that he would destroy the coal industry and thus destroy our economy. The mind numbed robots that supported him elected him anyway. They were not interested in the truth than and are not interested in the truth now. Hope and change, you gota love it.

[Debray]

Here is a site where you can grade your rep. and send them an email letting them know how you feel.

Grade Gov | They work for YOU. Remind them.

The Republicans that voted for this can be sent a message and a grade.
Mary Bono
Michael Castle
Mark Kirk
Frank Lobionde
John Mchugh
David Reichert
Christopher Smith

I sent them all a copy of the email I sent to Charlie Wilson, after voting "Nay"

Good Morning Charlie

I must say I am very proud of you today. I checked the voting record on the
Cap and Trade bill that passed in Congress, and I see you voted with the
"Noes" Thank You

No matter what President Obama says when he proclaims this bill is going to
punish those that pollute the environment, we all know that the so called
punishment will only be passed on to the consumer.

In this ailing economy the last thing we need is another hurtle to be thrown
in front of industry and business.

The claim that new jobs will be formed, building windmill, and solar panels
is great, but what happens to the coal miners in both strip and mine
operations, oil rig operators, truck drivers, tug boat operators, power
plant operators, ships crewman that transport oil and coal, the heating fuel
delivery drivers, and the list goes on and on.

Also what about the millions and millions of dollars the EPA just mandated
that the power plants spend to update their facilities to stop carbon
admissions that is already being passed on to the consumers, we have been
told our rate will increase by 25% in three years now?

I do believe this administrations goal is to completely collapse our
economy, and turn this great Country into a Socialist Country dependant on
the Government, your vote on Cap and Trade proves to me that their goal is
not your goal.

Thank You

Chuck White

[iteclab]

I work for a power company that uses coal and natural gas for fuel. This Cap & Trade will probably double the price of electricity in 2 years or less. And probably double again within 10 years or less. Power companies are being forced to buy land and solar & wind produced power to meet the new regulations. Often, the power companies have to enter into very lengthy contracts of leased land, usually otherwise worthless land. New power plants and high voltage lines have to be built on location, because you can't put the DC current on transmission lines. All very expensive.

Solar, wind and geothermal availability is still very limited, so these plants have to be built. The land for them has to be leased. Transmission lines have to be built. The water rights have to be obtained (or purchased). And none of it is free. All costs are passed on to the consumer. That's us. And that's just for electricity.

Gasoline, diesel, and natural gas will also have 'carbon taxes.' All of these will be taxed further to pay for the 'poor' and elderly since they will not be able to afford the increases. It will effect the price of everything we do, everything we buy and crush the futures of our children and grandchildren. But that's what they want. More government dependents.

Ultimately, Obama wants to take over the power companies so the government can regulate them like they do in Europe. Not to control costs. They don't care about that. Just to control us. After all, they know what's best for us, don't they?

[Scarecrow]

the more "change" I see the more sick I get... all from a guy who is not even qualified to be in the white house.

[Piece Corps]

My electric company, Progress Energy, has just been "dinged" by the state of Florida for charging its customers too much for fuel. Right now, we pay more in fuel charges than we do in KWH charges. Meanwhile, Florida Power & Light is asking to raise its rates so that its stockholders can make even more profit tha nthey are now.

And all of this has nothing to do with 'cap & trade'. If HR 2454 passes and is signed into law, we're in for one hell of a ride. But I'm still not convinced that it will pass in the Senate. We still have a chance.