Political Hay
Kerry’d Away on Cap and Trade
It’s not going to be easy for John Kerry and Barbara Boxer to get their climate bill through the Senate.
On Wednesday, cap and trade finally came to the Senate. Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) unveiled their their climate change legislation in response to the bill that narrowly passed the House earlier this year.
Kerry was optimistic that his bill would pass. “I’m convinced it has a shot,” he said in an interview with MSNBC. But the response to both the Kerry-Boxer legislation and the concept of cap and trade more generally has been less than overwhelming.
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) told Roll Call, “I am not committed to [carbon] cap-and-trade under any circumstance.” Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) punted, saying, “It’s a difficult issue.” Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) came out in favor of dropping cap and trade from any climate change bill back in August, preferring to focus on renewable energy instead. “The problem of doing both of them together is that it becomes too big of a lift,” she said at the time. “I see the cap-and-trade being a real problem.”
Kerry-Boxer is actually tougher in one key respect than the Waxman-Markey bill that passed the House. The Senate version requires a 20 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020. The House’s requirement is 17 percent. This has already cost the support of Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W. Va.), who wants any bill to address the needs of his coal-mining state.
“The climate legislation proposed today by Senators Boxer and Kerry is a disappointing step in the wrong direction and I am against it,” Rockefeller said in a statement. “Requiring 20 percent emission reductions by 2020 is unrealistic and harmful — it is simply not enough time to deploy the carbon capture and storage (CCS) and energy efficiency technologies we need. Period.”
Republican defections may be few and far between. John McCain campaigned in 2008 as a supporter of cap and trade, co-sponsoring a bill taking that approach to carbon emissions with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT). But when Reuters asked him if he supported the Kerry-Boxer bill, he replied, “Of course not. Never, never, never.” McCain is reportedly steamed about the short shrift the legislation gives to nuclear power.
If you think it is difficult to cobble together a health care bill that will win majority support, cap and trade is even more difficult. As Rockefeller’s Senate office notes, at least six different committees have jurisdiction over such legislation. There is a tug of war going on over the bill’s precise wording from both the left and right wings of the Democratic Party. Among Democrats alone, moderates and those who hail from energy-producing or manufacturing states that will be particularly hard hit are balking. So are some liberals like Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) who fear the regressiveness of a national energy tax and its impact on American competitiveness when other countries don’t follow suit.
All told, sources tell TAS that as many as 15 Senate Democrats are either opposed to cap and trade or on the fence. It would take as few as four to deny the majority the votes for cloture, which means that Kerry-Boxer would fall to a filibuster unless the Democratic leadership — already tangled in the weeds of health care — wanted to try to ram it through using the reconciliation process.
Obama budget director Peter Orszag previously estimated that a 15 percent reduction in emissions would cause the average American family to pay $1,300 in additional utility costs per year. That’s a smaller reduction than either the House or Senate version anticipates. The National Association of Manufacturers is predicting a loss of 3 to 4 million jobs under cap and trade, as businesses escape its costs by accelerating the shipping of jobs overseas. These concerns — and the effectiveness of Republican criticisms of “cap and tax” and the “light bulb tax” — are also giving swing-state Democrats pause.
“The more information Americans find out about the ‘cap and trade’ energy tax,” Congressman Steve Scalise (R-La.) told TAS in May, “the more they don’t like this attempt to impose a national tax on energy while shipping millions of American jobs overseas.” That is true of the Democrats representing them, too.
Debate over Kerry-Boxer is just beginning, and there remain influential Democratic constituencies that ardently favor cap and trade. If the health care bill stagnates due to an intraparty fight over the public option, pressure will mount on Senate Democrats to make progress on climate change legislation. But if the early signals are any indication, it looks like John Kerry has his work cut out for him.
About the Author
W. James Antle, III, author of the new book Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?, is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a senior editor of The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jimantle.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (151) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by W. James Antle, III
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/10/02/kerryd-away-on-cap-and-trade
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Northern Rebel| 10.2.09 @ 7:32AM
Oh sure, as soon as we get done rationing health care, we'll start rationing capitalism.
BRILLIANT!
ghd | 10.5.09 @ 3:42AM
Here at GHD Styler we are devoted to those who desire flawless hair and want to always look their best.We stock all of the latest ghd hair straighteners and accessories at competitive prices and offer a service that is second to none.
Pat Spooner| 10.2.09 @ 7:37AM
Kerry's cap and trade is quite simply another example of the "supposed" elitists sticking it to the serfs - they believe that they are so much smarter than the common folk. In fact Cap and Trade is just another government scheme to soak the working class and poor to increase government tax revenue while oppressing the working majority - this will give our political leadership more money to steal to hand out to their pals; and to keep working stiffs under thier control.
And to think that the class dunce believes he knows something about carbon dioxide's potential impact to the environment and global warming - HA!
Robert Rosencrans| 10.2.09 @ 7:47AM
The type of thinking exhibited by cap and trade shows you there is no shortage of con artists, circus clowns and confidence men/women on Capital Hill. Why is that you may ask? Because carbon dioxide comprises less then 1/2 percent of 1% of the atmosphere. That's right. Less then 1/2 of 1%. This is precisely why federal agencies like the EPA should have their budgets cut in half. All you have is bureaucrats with nothing to do hooked up to computers, creating crises for themselves to solve.
Another example of this was the EPA cooked up alarm over freon. They claimed it enlarged the ozone hole. As a result of the EPA belief, which never had any scientific backing, the American public was soaked for over a trillion dollars to change their AC systems to a different class of freon. The EPA then admitted it had no idea of what was affecting the ozone hole. Sheeesh!
http://mc-computing.com/qs/Glo.....ition.html
http://www.sweetliberty.org/is....._fraud.htm
Jim O'Brien| 10.2.09 @ 7:52AM
I have to wonder if Obama, Congress, and voters are aware of basic facts. For example: 1) greenhouse gases are not evil, they are essential to keeping the earth warm enough for humans; 2) the most common greenhouse gas is water vapor; 3) CO2 is not pollution, it is essential for plants and humans; 4) CO2 is only a trace element in the atmosphere at about 380 parts per million; 5) humans and their activities account for only 3% to 5% of CO2 emissions each year; 6) the earth has had cycles of cooling and warming about every 1,500 years due to variations in the sun’s activity and our orbit around the sun; 7) these cycles are beyond human control; 8) about 1,000 years ago, Greenland had vineyards; 9) the earth is cooling now, not warming relative to prior decades; and 10) a major reduction of sun spots in recent years suggests a coming mini ice age. (Two good books to read are "Climate Confusion" by Roy Spencer and "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years", by Fred Singer and Dennis Avery.)
Obama and most of Congress are ignoring the facts, ignoring the scientific evidence. Passing legislation which imposes new costs on electric utilities, and business in general, will result in skyrocketing energy costs ( a huge burden on every American), the loss of a few million more jobs here in the United States, lower GDP, and consequently lower tax revenues. In a word, such legislation is Stupid.
Jack Bibb| 10.4.09 @ 7:44AM
Mr. O'Brien,
I have heard your statistics quoted before, and they seem logical to me. I would like to know where you got them from? Are they from the two books you mentioned, if so, which would you recommend as a 'first read'.
Thanks
DCTJ| 10.2.09 @ 7:57AM
Americans are figuring out what this "climate bill" is all about it. It's a veiled tax with a feel good name. Legislation that will cost millions of jobs and thousands in energy costs is something we definitely don't need. Visit http://tiny.cc/pxIgi to voice your opposition to cap and trade.
RustyG| 10.2.09 @ 8:16AM
If the give RustyG $1,000,000,000 was proposed by the names Boxer and Kerry I would oppose it.
Timothy L. Pennell| 10.2.09 @ 8:22AM
If this were any other time, these people would have been dragged out of the Capitol, by now, and strung up on the nearest tree. We LIONIZE the FREEDOM FIGHTERS. Washington, Jefferson, John Brown. We look at The FRENCH REVOLUTION, and we see PATRIOTS overthrowing their OPPRESSIVE RULERS. How are the KERRYS and BOXERS, of our time, any different than the LOUIS XVI, and MARIE ANTOINETTE of that time?
UpChuck.Liberals| 10.3.09 @ 2:55PM
The Clothes?
Ryan| 10.2.09 @ 8:37AM
Timothy - leave the French Revolution out of the conversation. That was one of the most brutal, ill-conceived and terrible power grabs by one elite over another ever done. Robespierre is one of the greatest villains of history.
old white guy| 10.4.09 @ 8:45AM
ryan, you don't like the french revolution? you better figure out how to save your republic because flapping your gums doesn't seem to be working.
Skeptical Sam| 10.2.09 @ 8:37AM
If Congress really wanted to do something about carbon while addressing America's energy needs, they would ease the path toward nuclear power. Anything that does not promote nuclear is just unrealistic pandering to even more clueless Greenies or is a blatant attempt to ruin America.
Ryan| 10.2.09 @ 8:39AM
Politically speaking, cap and trade, if it passes (which it probably won't) is going to be the death knell for the hard left in the US, particularly after the Dems waste all their political capital on the health care and "stimulus" issues.
Pingback| 10.2.09 @ 8:46AM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : Kerry'd Away on Cap and Trade [spect links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ned| 10.2.09 @ 9:57AM
Is this the Senator John Kerry who served in Vietnam?
Tim| 10.2.09 @ 10:50AM
Now that you mention it, I think I read something somewhere about him and a boat, or was it a hat?
Tim| 10.2.09 @ 10:50AM
Now that you mention it, I think I read something somewhere about him and a boat, or was it a hat?
UpChuck.Liberals| 10.3.09 @ 2:57PM
I take exception to the word 'served'. Self-serving perhaps.
Son Of Sam | 10.2.09 @ 10:45AM
Funny old thing about words: supposedly "liberals" are supposed to have hearts that bleed for the poor, while Democrats are supposedly the party of the little guy. So why in hell are liberal Democrats in Congress so hell bent on jacking up the price of gasoline and home heating oil at a time when so many "little guys" are either out of work or have suffered cutbacks in pay and hours? Could it be that these same "liberals" are all millionaires who get a gasoline allowance from us the taxpayers?
Face facts: these scum aren't liberals. They are OBAMANAZIS
stay strong until freedom dawns
Son Of Sam
http://www.samadamssos.bravehost.com/
Oldefarte| 10.2.09 @ 11:53AM
The average American is obviously so stupid as to even be discussing the pros/cons of this---------it is nothing but WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION and/or WELFARE! It will not reduce environmental damage and that is not the intent of it. It is strictly/solely a MONEY GENERATION MECHANISM for Obama/Democrats to take income from utility companies/taxpayers in order to fund the government's welfareic agenda. There is an excellent front page article on Newsmax's website today detailing the various taxes/fees that Obama/Democrats are about to unleach onto Americans in order to pay for their WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION, and I'd suggest anyone so interested to read same!!!!
Bram| 10.2.09 @ 1:52PM
I don't think that this is wealth redistribution. It is simply wealth destruction and economic suicide.
Oldefarte| 10.2.09 @ 3:42PM
Let me 'splain' it to ya, okay? The government taxes/charges utilities that pollute, which generates tax REVENUE for the government. The taxed utilities 'pass on' the COST of those tax increases to their customers [ie American consumers who pay electric/utility bills] in the form of HIGHER ELECTRICITY BILLS. The government uses its increase tax revenue from taxing utilities to fund existing/additional WELFARE programs/agencies [ie affordable housing, food stanps,etc]. Therefore, you have money/income flowing from consumers paying increased electricity bills to their electric utilities, who pay/'pass on' that increased revenue to the government because of their increased taxes due. So you now have WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION-----comprehendee??????
Catherine| 10.2.09 @ 8:03PM
Olde . . you skip in your equation that the "source of the funding"(tax payer) will quickly run out of money to pay the higher fees to pass on the higher . . . . etc. That is called collapse of system!
All this talk afte Al-Gor said the discussion was over!!!! Tech, tech, don't you people listen at all????
Marc Jeric| 10.2.09 @ 2:13PM
In support of Jim O'Brien:
1) There was first in the 1970's the global cooling scam (see e.g. Newsweek April 28 1975 on the Internet); the government-paid scientists (90% of them are rejects of private enterprise) recommended to fight the new ice age by sending our war planes to cover the polar ice with soot in order to increase solar heat and so prevent crushing of New York skyscrapers by the new glaciers;
2) When that did not work we had the global warming hoax in the 1990's, proclaimed by mainly the same government-paid scientists (Dr. Hansen of the NOAA, for example); to prevent the massive heating, fires, flooding of coastal cities, disappearance of Florida, California, and Caribbean islands, massive hurricanes, global famine, and other catastrophic events we should nationalize oil and gas and coal and electricity companies;
3) after 11 years of considerable cooling we are now faced with the climate change flimflam where whatever happens with our climate we should nationalize oil and gas and coal and electricity companies; and why not our banks, car and insurance companies while we are at it. To prevent this catastrophe the best vehicle presumably is international agreements enforced by the United Nations world government.
As for the influence of carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas: on a normal day the atmosphere contains 10,000 ppm (parts per million) of water vapor and about 300 ppm of carbon dioxide. The government-paid scientists say that an increase of 100 ppm of CO2 over the next 50 years will result in a catastrophic warming. The thermal absorptivity of water vapor is 4 times larger than that of carbon dioxide; it follows that the CO2 increase will increase the overall thermal absorptivity of the mixture by about 1/4 of one percent. The production of methane from livestock flatulence and the rotting swamps (called "wetlands" by the environmentalists) vastly surpasses the influence of human-produced CO2.
There is the Global Warming Petition Project (see Internet) where 31,478 US independent scientists declared that there is no anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming; of these 9,029 are scientists with PhD degrees. Our environmentalists tried to sabotage this effort by submiiting phony names with phoney degrees - and then claimed the whole effort by the Petition scientists was a fraud. It took us 3 years and a lot of private money to verify the credentials of all the signatories and clean up the Petition of those saboteurs. See also Manhattan Declaration with more such signatories, plus a large number of scientific groups from other countries who state the same.
I am one of these signatories, MS and PhD degrees from UCLA, with majors in thermodynamics and heat & mass transfer.
I think to fight this communist attempt to secure a permanent hold on power should not be fought on the narrow grounds of more taxes - that is the losing proposition; where about 50% of the population is on some kind of welfare we will always be outvoted. The battle should be fought and won on the firm scientific basis.
4) And now we have "cap™" power grab.
SCAM - HOAX - FLIMFLAM - POWER GRAB!!!
Nick| 10.3.09 @ 11:23AM
Mr. Jeric,
I agree with you about the battle.
Senator Jim Inhofe constantly refers to AGW as a hoax rather than how much damage it will or will not do to the economy.
Which only makes sense. Why argue the economic pros and cons of something that is totally bogus?
Unfortunately we have twits like McCain and O'Reilly who are global warming useful idiots.
old white guy| 10.4.09 @ 8:49AM
quite something eh. people who don't believe in God think they have the power to control the climate as if they were gods. science hmmmm.
JP| 10.2.09 @ 3:01PM
"Kerry-Boxer is actually tougher in one key respect than the Waxman-Markey bill that passed the House. The Senate version requires a 20 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020."
If the global recession continues we may just get to the 20% reduction (or an 80ppm CO2 reduction to 320ppm) by 2016 without even implementing Cap and Trade.
The Climate Change Alarmists should be rejoicing. But a continuation of the recession may just cost most of them thier jobs.
Alan| 10.2.09 @ 4:06PM
John F. Kerry was a "D" student at Harvard. He almost failed LAW and now he believes himself as a SCIENTIST!!!???!!! Gimme a BREAK!!!! What a self centered, arrogant FOOL!!! How can the people of Massachusetts keep re-electing this IDIOT???
Catherine| 10.2.09 @ 8:07PM
Alan, "How can thepeople of Massachusettes keep re-electing this IDIOT??" Possibly with a little help of a nut . . spelled A C O R N?
Oldefarte| 10.3.09 @ 11:49AM
Cath, You should take a refresher history course on Massachusetts. The Kennedys held power there long before Acorn existed [and Acorn has nothing to do with that state's politics]. The Kennedys do not need Acorn's influence to elect liberal candidates, like other, more moderate states do. Even after Teddy drowned Mary Jo, the morons in that state reelected him time and again, when any other sane state would have had the rope over the tree. Massachusetts was the FIRST STATE to pass a SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LAW, so that should tell you how imbicilic those people really are!!!!
Obie Wan| 10.3.09 @ 8:50PM
Living in Mass. I can tell you it's NOT ACORN that keeps re-electing D'craps to all it's government seats. Mass is and for many years has been a liberal\socialist state populated by large numbers of Canadian\Italian\Irish, Roman Catholic Democrap voters. Civil service labor unions have large and influential political groups and most of the elderly vote Democrap in this state. While there are about 25% of us conservatives who live here, it's almost impossible to make any headway at the polls which is why marxists like John Kerry,Barney Frank and the late Ted Kennedy never had to worry about losing an election !!!
Terry in Georgia| 10.2.09 @ 7:32PM
With all other options of taxation accounted for, the eco-alarmists are making an all-out effort to tax the very air we breathe, the sources of energy that run the homes and businesses across the country, light bulbs (including a specific provision for regulating the bulbs federal offices must use), all while banning exploration of new and existing sources that could easily supply ALL of the US energy needs and completely and totally free us from dependence on foreign suppliers.
Constant restrictions, limitations and outright bans by our government representatives stifle the productivity and economic benefits to substantially and dramatically benefit America's financial growth and strength. These don't sound to me like actions that are for the good of the country. And until we can see the greater need to provide for human over minnow populations, common sense tells me we probably shouldn't dwell on how to regulate the use of the supply of air to the universe.
We actually have congressional opposition to allowing water to be supplied for the growth and survival of crops which have long provided great portions of the US food supply, as well as the farmers and residents of an entire valley in California -- to protect a species of MINNOWS -- over HUMAN LIFE. Only a truly radical idiot would choose the protection of minnows over their own family (both biological and national). I think food and water are just about two of the most basic needs and would much prefer protections for the basic nourishment of our people.
Yosemeti Sam| 10.3.09 @ 11:23AM
Kerry - who BTW served in Vietnam for
reportedly 4 months - looks good with
Boxer who is serving bankrupt-ridden
'Green' California. LOL.
UpChuck.Liberals| 10.3.09 @ 3:03PM
You're being kind in saying that they 'look good'. The only way they would truly look good is exiting the political stage forever.
Which, IMHO goes for every lying, thieving, half-baked politician.
ima_nemisis| 10.4.09 @ 2:20AM
Cap and Traitors!! Kerry-Boxer, both s/b targets in their Senatorial races. This Blue Dog Democrat would never vote for these dorks. Neither deserve to be elected to anything...what a complete waste of our time...run 'em out of office, CA and MA.
Pingback| 10.4.09 @ 2:10PM
SNL – Obama Accomplishments? Just 2, Jack & Squat (video) « VotingFemale Speaks! links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
whyyeseyec| 10.4.09 @ 5:43PM
I agree with poster Robt Rosencrans when he says `This is precisely why federal agencies like the EPA should have their budgets cut in half. All you have is bureaucrats with nothing to do hooked up to computers, creating crises for themselves to solve.`
This is pretty much what all govn agencies at every level do. Create crises` where crises` don`t exist. I`m for abolishing the EPA altogether and throwing in the Calif Air Resources Board along with it. These types of govn agencies are bankrupting our economy and usurping our Constitution.
Pingback| 10.5.09 @ 12:16AM
Picture of the Day 10/05/09 – Worst losses for a year as Taliban storm Nato outpost a links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.5.09 @ 4:32AM
Things Not Looking Good For John Kerry And Barbara Boxer’s Cap-And-Trade Bill | Tea links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
jody| 10.6.09 @ 1:47AM
you may also be interested in
Cap and Trade 1
Cap and Trade 2
Pingback| 10.6.09 @ 9:34AM
SNL – Obama Accomplishments? Just 2, Jack & Squat (video); Update: SNL under attack F links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.7.09 @ 12:20PM
Pak Army's top brass not amused with 'stern conditions' in Kerry … | Senior Health Wi links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
dfgrt| 2.25.10 @ 4:12AM
Mac AVCHD Converter,
Blu-ray to AVCHD for Mac
yanyan | 10.10.11 @ 4:00PM
Such a great post and interesting comments. I found this post while surfing the web for Thanks for sharing this article.mesothelioma attorneys
rechie | 10.24.11 @ 9:43AM
yes this a great post but please give your point of view with the above topic.
yaz class action | 10.22.11 @ 3:16PM
GUYS I AM WAITING OF YOUR RESPONSE HERE. BUT I AM VERY THANKFUL TO THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO GIVE INFORMATIVE COMMENTS TOO
balcuizar62| 10.12.11 @ 9:39PM
This is very nice post! I will bookmark this blog. You may follow me by my best
yaz lawsuit
fiance visa| 10.17.11 @ 9:52PM
It was another joy to see your post. It is such an important topic and ignored by so many, even professionals. I thank you to help making people more aware of possible issues. Great stuff as usual...
fiance visa
creamer| 10.19.11 @ 9:27PM
I was a student ,like English very much ,because some resons I gave up it .but now I want to learn it again .believe me!!GO GO !!!
Actos Lawsuits
L Tod Schlosser | 11.4.11 @ 1:22PM
I think we need an updated version now.
L Tod Schlosser
devourment| 11.4.11 @ 2:29PM
Really i admire this post, its useful information, I read this whole and carefully. This article covers the all required thing. I can say that you did your best
L Tod Schlosser
PIERCE| 11.8.11 @ 3:18AM
Furthermore, i have e-mailed you concerning would it be easy for us to change our links, hope listening to you soon.
filipina girls
chester| 11.11.11 @ 2:04AM
Thanks for this very useful info you have provided us. I will bookmark this for future reference and refer it to my friends. More power to your blog.
zoloft lawsuit