Climate Change Bill Faces Hurdles Due To GOP, Some Dems

By: Stephanie Condon
Topics: Domestic Issues

(AP Photo/Gene Blythe)

Under their self-imposed deadline, House Democrats have until the end of this week to finalize a comprehensive energy and climate change bill. To do so, they'll have to deal with 23 Republicans who have united to stall the legislation by offering an alternative version and possibly more than 400 amendments.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee kicked off today what is likely to be a long and arduous process of altering the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" so that it can win committee approval. Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), one of the lead sponsors of the bill, has said he wants the bill to be ready for a full House vote by Memorial Day.

In order to achieve his goal, Waxman must ensure no more than six Democrats on the committee vote against the bill. During today's meeting, however, some Democrats raised previously unvoiced objections, according to The Hill.

The 932-page bill seeks a 17 percent reduction, by the year 2020, in carbon and other polluting emissions from 2005 levels. The legislation aims to meet that goal by imposing a renewable electricity standard. It would also put a price on carbon emissions through a "cap-and-trade" system, which would enable industries to buy and trade permits that allow them to emit certain levels of carbon.

A number of compromises have already been worked into the legislation. To appease members of Congress worried that the bill will increase energy costs for consumers, the bill now allocates about $10 billion in revenues from the cap-and-trade permit auctions to help low-income Americans offset the cost of their energy bills. For those concerned how the bill would impact carbon-emitting industries, not all of the permits will be auctioned -- a portion of the permits will be given away to impacted industries. For instance, the electricity sector will receive 35 percent of its allowances for free.

The 23 Republicans on the energy committee, however, remain solidly opposed to the bill. On Friday, they sent a letter to Waxman asking for at least one hearing to address the allocation of the pollution permits.

"What is the hurry?" the letter asks, referring to the Memorial Day deadline. "If we wanted a bill sure to embarrass our committee, this is precisely the process we would adopt to create one."

Dead set on stalling the bill, the Republicans are offering an alternative bill and plan to drag out this week's committee discussion with a variety of amendments. One amendment, in a clear jab at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), would make the Presidio - a national park in Pelosi's San Francisco district - a carbon capture and storage facility.

Dozens of possible amendments address the economic concerns behind the bill and would suspend the act should it result in job losses in various states. For instance, one potential amendment would suspend it if more than 5,000 jobs in West Virginia were lost due to its implementation. Amendments could also be offered to allow states to opt out of the act.

Other amendments would surely anger environmentalists, such as one to end restrictions on incremental hydropower construction on wild and scenic waterways, or one that seeks less ambitious emissions reduction goals. While the bill in its current state focuses on stimulating alternative energy industries like wind and solar, one possible amendment would ensure that coal plants currently under construction are able to be completed.

Republican leaders have said they intend to stall the bill in committee for months. If they succeed, they could hang up one of President Obama's top priorities.

In his weekly radio address on Saturday, Mr. Obama called the legislation a "historic" agreement.

"It's a plan that will finally reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and cap the carbon pollution that threatens our health and our climate," he said. "Most important, it's a plan that will trigger the creation of millions of new jobs for Americans."

Regardless of how far the bill gets in the House this week, however, complementary legislation in the Senate has yet to gain much momentum. The newspaper Roll Call quoted a senior Senate Democratic aide on Monday who said, "There are a substantial number of moderate Democrats who are uneasy at best" with the House legislation.

Stephanie Condon
Stephanie Condon is a political reporter for CBSNews.com.
Follow on Twitter »

46 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 46 Comments


by evilbusheviks May 19, 2009 3:36 PM EDT: by noloyalisti:

We need to get rid of ALL the Republi CONS and half the Dems and then we can take down the big corporations.

**********************

Unfortunately, with this 1886 SCOTUS ruling, the era of robber barons and global corporate rule began to the detriment of U.S. citizens.

1886 Supreme Court decision granting corporations the same rights as living persons under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution

In 1886, . . . in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a private corporation is a person and entitled to the legal rights and protections the Constitutions affords to any person. Because the Constitution makes no mention of corporations, it is a fairly clear case of the Court's taking it upon itself to rewrite the Constitution.
Far more remarkable, however, is that the doctrine of corporate personhood, which subsequently became a cornerstone of corporate law, was introduced into this 1886 decision without argument.

The court reporter duly entered into the summary record of the Court's findings that:
The defendant Corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteen Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Thus it was that a two-sentence assertion by a single judge elevated corporations to the status of persons under the law, prepared the way for the rise of global corporate rule, and thereby changed the course of history.

The doctrine of corporate personhood creates an interesting legal contradiction. The corporation is owned by its shareholders and is therefore their property. If it is also a legal person, then it is a person owned by others and thus exists in a condition of slavery -- a status explicitly forbidden by the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. So is a corporation a person illegally held in servitude by its shareholders? Or is it a person who enjoys the rights of personhood that take precedence over the presumed ownership rights of its shareholders? So far as I have been able to determine, this contradiction has not been directly addressed by the courts.

www.ratical.org/corporations/SCvSPR1886.html; Reply to this comment


by noloyalisti May 19, 2009 3:19 PM EDT: The problem with America is that you can be a right wing extremist like Boner, Palin, McSame, etc. and get elected to office. You cannot be an extreme leftist to do the same. You have to be moderate or the corporations in charge will get upset and hatchet you.; Reply to this comment


by noloyalisti May 19, 2009 1:48 PM EDT: OMG, the government is regulating the unfeeling and uncaring big corporations who have raped and almost killed the planet. OMG it's SOCIALISM!!!! Help, they are going to put us into concentrations camps and have the terrorists torture us. Aghhhhhhhhhhh!; Reply to this comment

by endurorob May 19, 2009 1:42 PM EDT

We need to get rid of ALL the Republi CONS and half the Dems and then we can take down the big corporations.
Posted by noloyalisti at 10:29 AM : May 19, 2009

I have read some nutty posts on here but this about takes the cake.

Reply to this comment


by evilbusheviks May 19, 2009 3:17 PM EDT: Keep up the good work, and praise your leader rushbo as he moves your party even further right and pushes all moderates away.

GOP Losses Span Nearly All Demographic Groups

May 18, 2009

PRINCETON, NJ -- The decline in Republican Party affiliation among Americans in recent years is well documented, but a Gallup analysis now shows that this movement away from the GOP has occurred among nearly every major demographic subgroup. Since the first year of George W. Bush's presidency in 2001, the Republican Party has maintained its support only among frequent churchgoers, with conservatives and senior citizens showing minimal decline.

www.gallup.com/poll/118528/GOP-Losses-Span-Nearly-Demographic-Groups


by noloyalisti May 19, 2009 1:29 PM EDT: Of course the GOP is opposed they are the party of NO. But beyond that, the real problem is that we have allowed big oil corporations with their tools the GOP to run the country.

We need to get rid of ALL the Republi CONS and half the Dems and then we can take down the big corporations.; Reply to this comment


by evilbusheviks May 19, 2009 12:26 PM EDT: We arent the party of NO, we are the party of YES< THE PEOPLE AN...

posted by McHineguy
*************

Whatever that's supposed to mean......

I don't belong to any party, since WE THE PEOPLE lost the minute the SCOTUS gave corporations in the 19th century, the same rights as individuals, despite this never being in Our Constitution!

Since then, the robber barons of the oligarchic plutocracy have ruled America, through their lobbyists and huge amounts of money, and if you actually "think" that WE THE PEOPLE have any say in our government or laws today, you're sadly mistaken and completely wrong!

It's a nice thought, but only insane people spew that rhetoric!; Reply to this comment


by evilbusheviks May 19, 2009 12:18 PM EDT: inketolstoy wrongly states:

"I see that your logic has attracted a liberal attack dog who will not allow any attempt at reason or sense to be uttered here."

*******************

You sound just like many of the delusional republiCON posters here, saying that President Obama has taken away their rights and freedoms, but when pressed on that idiotic point, they cannot "think" of even ONE that has been taken away!

Just like in your post -- "liberal attack dog who will not allow any attempt at reason or sense to be uttered here" -- whom or which "attack dog" has removed your right to FREE SPEECH?"

Just because I don't believe in the failed CONStipated CONServitard policies and ideology that governed America over the past 30 years, it certainly doesn't mean I don't believe in ALL Our Constitutional rights -- not only the 2nd Amendment that republiCONS "think" isthe only Amendment and right!

BTW......... it was the Un-patriot Act of 2001 by the GOP-led congresscritters that infinged upon and removed more of Our Constitutional rights and freedoms than anything else in American history! FACT!; Reply to this comment


by evilbusheviks May 19, 2009 11:59 AM EDT: The republiCON party of ignorant southern, white, evangelicals has NO VISION -- NO NEW IDEAS -- NO SOLUTIONS -- just more of the same B.S.
Posted by evilbusheviks
******************

The facts are that we dont believe government should be meddling in these things. They cant even get their story straight and they have NEVER demostrated ability to manage things. We arent the party of NO, we are the party of YES< THE PEOPLE AN, if government will only get out of the way and stop stealing the fruits of labor.
by McHineguy
**********

Nah.....not joking at all, since that was a generalized statement about all the ignorant republiCONS -- not personally directed towards YOU -- but if you feel froggy, and "think" it pertains to you too, go right ahead and join the marginalized minority party with it as a fact!

You're definitely the party of NO CLUE, and this is obviously shown as the republiCONS grew government throughout the bushevik years and made Bill Clinton look much more conservative than even "ronnie the rat" raygun or either one of the moronic bushies! You can try pushing all that false rhetoric on the masses, but you republiCONS need to follow through on the idiotic message to be taken seriously!

BTW, just as a point of factual knowledge.....our government already controls about 50% of all our health care, and with 78 million baby boomers retiring over the next 2 decades, do you honestly "think" that we'll have less on Medicare/Medicaid/V.A. benefits, and that your little ideology of smaller government will come true?

I'm willing to make you a huge bet on that one......

Oh....and if we don't see major health care reform soon, the huge spiraling costs of the for-profit health care debacle will top even the $50 Trillion in unfunded future liabilities that we already heard about during bushworld! We need change, and any person with even half a brain will understand that, not just spew the same, old, tired LIES and PROPAGANDA I hear every time I turn on *** NoNooz.

Sorry, the reason the republiCON party is so marginalized today, is that they are still using the OLD message of the 20th century, and we need a brand new message and path in the 21st century!; Reply to this comment


by inketolstoy May 19, 2009 11:51 AM EDT: No we we need a sustainable economy who support the people who live here. I am for green initiatives but not at the cost of destroying our economy. It seems OBama thinks he can take all free capital to pay for his ambitious plans while encouraging enterprise.

Excellent post. I see that your logic has attracted a liberal attack dog who will not allow any attempt at reason or sense to be uttered here.; Reply to this comment


by evilbusheviks May 19, 2009 11:26 AM EDT: We need tax incentives for all businesses -- small and large -- that create jobs right here in America, as well as those that have lower greenhouse gas emissions and are Earth-friendly!
Posted by evilbusheviks
*****************

No we we need a sustainable economy who support the people who live here. I am for green initiatives but not at the cost of destroying our economy.
posted by alanrobisch
*******************

WRONG! We've already been following almost 30 years of CONStipated CONServitard policies and ideology with "trickle-down" economic lunacy, which only gave America a larger gap between the ultra-wealthy and the rest of us, and millions upon millions of offshored jobs to Chindia!

We kept hearing the same rhetorical B.S. from the busheviks over the past 8 miserable years of how addressing global warming with any new economic policies about emissions would just devastate our economy.

Hey.....don't look now, but the bush/cheney depression started in Dec. 2007 -- a full year and a half ago -- making this the worst recession/depression since the Great Depression -- all because of idiotic CONServitard policies of DEREGULATION and "trickle-down" economic lunacy helping only the wealthy of the oligarchic plutocracy!

Get a clue for once in your life!; Reply to this comment