Here’s the scenario — it’s 14 days after the 2010 midterm
elections. The American people made their voices heard at the
ballot box and voted for an ideological shift in the United
States Congress. But despite this clear voter sentiment, a desire
for change, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid decides to announce
an aggressive legislative agenda to finish out the second session
of the 111th Congress.
That’s not a far-fetched scenario to envision, especially
when it comes to Senate Democrats making a last run at passing
cap-and-trade. It’s a possibility Carol Browner, Obama’s energy
and environmental czar raised
in a TV interview recently. So shouldn’t it be
taken seriously?
One of the key storylines in this scenario would be the
swearing in of the winner of the special election for Vice
President Joe Biden’s former Senate seat in November. Right now,
there are three legitimate contenders — 2006 Delaware U.S.
Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell and Rep. Mike Castle on the
Republican side, and on the Democratic side Delaware businessman
Christopher Coons. Most
polling gives Castle an edge over O’Donnell and
Coons. And that’s a problem.
The problem is the winner will be seated right after the
election and would give that newly sworn-in member the ability to
vote on bills during the so-called lame-duck session. And if
cap-and-trade comes up during the session, there’s a historical
precedent showing how Castle would vote.
Castle has been friendly with the environmental movement
in the past, but the most telling part of the
narrative is that in 2009, when the House passed its version of
the bill,
Castle was a “yes” vote. One of eight
Republicans to go the other way, he had no qualms with bucking
the trend of his party. The question is, why?
It’s not as simple as labeling Castle a greenie,
tree-hugging Republican, but more along the line of the interests
supporting the nine-term congressman. As Delaware’s former
governor, Castle has a pattern of looking after the banking
industry, a major component of the state’s economy. He did this
first as public servant in state government, but more recently in
Congress as a member of the House Financial Services
Committee.
Should cap-and-trade be signed into law, it would place
limits on carbon emissions, and as
National Center for Public Policy Research’s Tom Borelli
says, it would lead to “the creation of the largest
commodity market in the world.” Borelli adds that the Commodities
Futures Trading Commission estimates a $2-trillion futures market
would be created “in relatively short order,” which he says would
be larger than the futures market for oil and gas.
An entire new trading market created out of thin air? It’s
no wonder Castle would be on board. Wall Street firms would stand
to profit off of each transaction made in on such an exchange. So
the immediate benefits of cap-and-trade for the banking industry
would certainly outweigh any long-term concerns it may present
the industry for the overall economy.
Because of its lax regulations and corporate governance
laws, more than 50 percent of all publicly traded companies in
the United States, including 63 percent of Fortune 500 companies
have made Delaware their “legal” home, according
to the state’s website. The same is true with the
banking industry.
With that distinction of being corporation-friendly, Bank
of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank and Barclays
all have a major presence within the state and have considerable
influence in the Delaware state legislature. However, these banks
wield that influence beyond Dover and into Washington as
well.
Take a look at Castle’s campaign contributors. The Delaware
congressman has been a favorite of the banking industry when it
comes time to filling campaign coffers. According to the Center
for Responsive Politics website OpenSecrets.org, since his
election to Congress in 1992,
three of Castle’s top five contributors have
been from the banking industry — MBNA Corp (acquired by Bank of
America in 2006), Bank of America and Morgan Stanley. And 10 of
his top 20 contributors
were banking firms.
As things stand now, Reid has demonstrated he has been able
to break filibuster by peeling off a few votes for cloture, in
particular Massachusetts’s Scott Brown and Maine’s Olympia Snowe
and Susan Collins. But with the departure of Sen. Ted Kaufmann,
the current Delaware junior senator, the Democratic leadership
will either have to find one more vote to get legislation through
in this lame-duck session, or they have to find one less vote,
particularly on cap-and-trade, if Castle wins the race.
So why would Mike Castle be dangerous in a 2010 lame-duck
session of the U.S. Senate with cap-and-trade legislation on the
table? The answer is pretty obvious.
