By Dina Cappiello and H. Josef Hebert, Washington (AP)
Legislation imposing the first nationwide limits on the pollution blamed for global warming advanced in the House late Thursday, clearing a key committee despite strong Republican opposition.
The Energy and Commerce Committee approved the sweeping climate bill 33-25 after repeatedly turning back GOP attempts to kill or weaken the measure during four days of debate.
The panel’s action increases the likelihood that the full House for the first time will address broad legislation to tackle climate change later this year. The Senate has yet to take up the issue.
Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the panel’s chairman, said the bill represents “decisive and historic action” to increase America’s energy security and deal with global warming. “When this bill is enacted into law, we will break our dependence on foreign oil, make our nation the world leader in clean energy jobs and technology, and cut global-warming pollution,” said Waxman.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has promised to press for passage of climate legislation this year, but prospects remain uncertain, especially in the Senate. President Barack Obama has told Congress he too wants a bill this year, ahead of international climate talks in December.
The House bill requires factories, refineries and power plants to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and six other greenhouse gases by roughly 80 percent by mid-century and hasten the nation’s energy shift away from fossil fuels by putting a price on carbon dioxide releases.
Only one Republican - Rep. Mary Bono Mack of California - crossed party lines in support of the bill. Four Democrats voted against it. She said that while she had concerns about the bill, including its cost, the country can’t wait “to make needed changes to our energy policy.”
Waxman had vowed to get the 946-page bill out of his committee before Memorial Day. Pressure on lawmakers to leave for the holiday recess pushed the committee to wrap up late Thursday after considering more than 80 amendments, 56 of them from Republicans and many designed to weaken or kill the bill.
“The American people are overwhelming calling for a new direction ... to take action in a way that changes forever our relationship with imported oil, with the loss of jobs overseas, with the pollution that is causing greenhouse gas warming on our planet,” said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., a co-sponsor of the bill.
Republicans argued that the pollution cuts would lead to soaring energy prices and threaten economic growth by imposing new costs on energy intensive industries already facing economic hardships.
“We don’t want to put the economy in jeopardy,” said Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the committee’s ranking Republican. He offered an alternative that would have scrapped the cap on greenhouse gases and pollution trading scheme, provide more incentives for nuclear energy and bolster research into capturing carbon from coal-burning power plants. It was defeated 35-19.
Barton said he had “serious concern about the redirection of our energy policy in America.”
“For the sake of our nation I hope to some degree you are right. I’m afraid that you’re not. We will see,” Barton told Waxman minutes before the vote.
To ease the economic impact, supporters of the bill said, the government would issue pollution allowances, or permits, to businesses that could be traded on the open market. The bill calls for giving away 35 percent of the pollution permits to electric utilities that otherwise would likely pass the additional costs onto consumes. The government also would sell 15 percent of the allowances and use the money to provide direct relief to consumers.
“It is very clear that ratepayers are going to be protected,” Waxman insisted.
To get the support of Democrats from coal and industrial states, Waxman agreed to give away significant emissions allowances to industries in their states, including the electric utilities, steel manufactures, automakers and refineries. Waxman also scaled back the required greenhouse gas reductions between now and 2020 from 20 percent to 17 percent. And he eased the requirement for utilities to use renewable energy such as wind and solar for electricity production.
Democrats also added language to create a clean energy bank to disperse grants for new forms of energy and inserted a “cash for clunkers” program that would provide rebates to consumers who turn in gas guzzling vehicles for more fuel-efficient cars.
See post here and more at Climate Depot.
Heartland Institute
On June 2, 2009, Heartland will be hosting the Third International Conference on Climate Change at the Washington Court Hotel in Washington, DC. ICECAP is one of over 60 co-sponsors of the event. It will call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted “consensus” on various aspects of climate change and global warming.
The purpose of the event is to expose Congressional staff and journalists to leading scientists and economists in the nation’s capital. Senators and Representatives will be invited to speak side-by-side with leading scientists and economists. Allied organizations have been invited to be cosponsors, to help supply speakers and promote the event to their members and supporters.
The conference’s theme will be “Climate Change: Scientific Debate and Economic Analysis.” The theme reflects the fact that the scientific debate is not over and that economic analysis is more important than ever, now that legislation is being seriously considered. The real science and economics of climate change support the view that global warming is not a crisis and that immediate action to reduce emissions is not necessary. This is, in fact, the emerging consensus view of scientists outside the IPCC and most economists outside environmental advocacy groups.
The first conference, which took place in March 2008 in New York, dramatized the view that global warming is not a crisis, that it is probably natural and not caused by human activity, and that computer models are unreliable guides to future temperature change. The second conference, which took place in March 2009 in New York, focused on areas where alarmists have lost credibility and where skeptics have gained ground during the past year.
The complete program for the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change, including links to videos and PowerPoint presentations as they become available, is here. A copy of the printed program from the conference, which includes cosponsor information and brief biographies of all speakers, can be downloaded in Adobe’s PDF format here.
Click here for the full proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change—including audio and video for more than 100 speakers.
Icecap still has 1 admission ticket available if you are in the DC area and would like to attend. E-mail me at jsdaleo@yahoo.com or jdaleo@icecap.us.
By Marc Morano, Climate Depot
Commissioner Foster Campbell of the Louisiana Public Service Commission is demanding to know why a witness skeptical of man-made global warming was not “shut down” during a May 13, 2009 hearing in Baton Rouge. According to an article in The Times-Picayune on May 19, 2009, Campbell was irate that Climate Depot’s executive editor Marc Morano was invited to speak at the hearing by Commissioner Eric Skrmetta. The paper reported: “Campbell criticized [Chairman] Boissiere for not shutting down Morano’s presentation.”
Campbell attempted to verbally grill Morano during the hearing and has since publicly accused the Climate Depot editor of being a “phony” and a “hack” who is part of a “fringe group” and he accused Morano of “deception” and taking “quotes out of context.” (See: Global warming presentation prompts Foster Campbell to ask for PSC testimony under oath )
Campbell, who engaged in a testy back and forth during the hearing with Morano, is now apparently demanding any future witnesses that challenge his scientific understanding of global warming be promptly “shut down.” The Times-Picayune reported: “After a presenter at last week’s Public Service Commission meeting asserted that global warming is a hoax, Commissioner Foster Campbell said Tuesday he plans to introduce a motion at the June meeting requiring most people testifying before the commission to do so under oath.” [Morano note: The paper is incorrect; I never testified that global warming a “hoax.” ]
Campbell’s call for future witnesses to be sworn-in is apparently his attempt to scare off any future skeptics of man-made global warming fears from testifying. Campbell somehow implies “swearing” in witnesses would somehow force witnesses to change their dissenting views of climate change. [Morano note: Sadly, it seems as though Campbell actually believes that if you present scientific evidence refuting Gore’s climate view, you must be a liar.]
The paper reported that Morano’s testimony “upstaged” Campbell’s invited witness. “Marc Morano, a former aide to Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma who now runs an anti-global-warming website called ClimateDepot.com, said there’s no proof that the planet is getting hotter and called the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change a ‘political gimmick.’” [Morano note: I merely quoted award-winning physicist Dr. Claude Allegre—who reversed his view on warming to become a skeptic—stating Gore’s Nobel award was “a political gimmick.” ]
The paper continued: “Campbell maintains that [his witness] offered the commission an analysis of a proposed policy change while Morano, who once worked for Rush Limbaugh, delivered a political rant that was of no value to the commission. He criticized [Chairman] Boissiere for not shutting down Morano’s presentation.”
[Morano note: A frustrated Campbell sat through my presentation which contained extensive analysis of cap-and-trade and I cited peer-reviewed scientific studies, award-winning scientists and the latest real world developments exposing the errors in man-made climate fears. My testimony even cited left wing environmentalists and promoters of global warming fears like the UK’s James Lovelock, NASA’s James Hansen and Green Party candidate Ralph Nader trashing the concept of cap-and-trade as “verging on a gigantic scam.” In addition, I presented the overwhelming polling data showing the public is rejecting climate fears. ]
During the question and answer portion of the testimony, Campbell accused Morano of representing “big business” and not being kind to former Vice President Al Gore. Campbell has been on a public relations war path since Morano’s 35 minute testimony at the hearing. Last week, Campbell released a May 14, 2009 letter calling Morano a “political operator from Washington, D.C. and he accused him of giving a “far-right sermon on Global Warming straight out of Rush Limbaugh, complete with obscure references, quotes out of context and personal attacks on a former Vice President and winner of the Nobel Prize.” Campbell called Morano’s testimony a “political circus.” He then went on to label him a “hack” who used “deception.”
[Morano note: In addition to providing comic relief, Campbell’s angry rants are quite chilling. As the science behind man-made global warming fears utterly collapses, many of the biggest promoters of the theory are growing increasingly desperate.
NASA’s James Hansen has called for trials of climate skeptics in 2008 for “high crimes against humanity.” Environmentalists Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at skeptics of 2007 declaring “This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors”. In 2006, the eco-magazine Grist called for Nuremberg-Style trials for skeptics. In 2008, Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki called for government leaders skeptical of global warming to be “thrown into jail.” In 2007, The Weather Channel’s climate expert called for withholding certification of skeptical meteorologists. A 2008 report found that ‘Climate blasphemy‘ is replacing traditional religious blasphemy. (See also: A July 2007 Senate report details how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation].
See more here.