Today, a Senate committee approved the Kerry/Boxer climate change bill, which signals to the world U.S. commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions before international negotiations next month in Copenhagen.
An interesting turn of events is what role will the U.S. Chamber of Commerce play in climate change legislation? The Chamber has maintained global warming is beneficial, and advocated a "Scopes monkey trial" on climate change science. Now, the Chamber says it supports legislation but it's unclear whether its "changing its tune, or just its tone?" This is important because Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman have commenced a process to broaden support for climate change legislation in which the Chamber's views are essential but the details will not be publicly aired.
Last month, Senators John Kerry and Lindsey Graham joined forces to write an op-ed for The New York Times to announce that they had found a "framework for climate legislation to pass Congress." This plan includes nuclear power as a "core component of electricity generation" in order to meet emission reduction targets. Additional measures included financial incentives for development of carbon capture and sequestration technology, additional onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration and a "mechanism to protect businesses – and ultimately consumers – from increases in energy prices."
This op-ed has now blossomed into a "process" where Kerry, Graham and Lieberman are working to "broaden support for a climate bill beyond members of the six Senate committees with jurisdiction." It is not clear whether these Senators are involved in a coalition-building process or plan to "craft a measure of their own." Some news reports characterize as a process, not a bill and other reports state that the trio is consulting with the White House "not merely to get the executive branch's input on the Kerry-Boxer bill, but to help build a parallel bill that they will pass onto Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)."
This "dual-track" approach has the "full consent and support" of both Boxer and Reid, Kerry told reporters at a press conference. The compromise bill, the three senators said, could help Reid reconcile the six versions of Kerry-Boxer that ultimately clear the Senate committees with jurisdiction over the climate legislation.
In any event, the three senators are negotiating climate change proposals but Senator Kerry has stated that details will not be publicly aired:
Kerry insisted that the three senators would keep their focus on closed-door negotiations in an efforts to win over more than 60 votes on the proposal. "We're just at the beginning stage," he said. "One thing I'll say, we're not going to negotiate this publicly, day by day, drip by drip. We're going to do this in a way that maximizes the privacy of putting something like this together."
However, some clues about what might be acceptable terms in the K/G/L measure have been provided in addition to the op-ed.
Since the op-ed, Lieberman has stated that he expects the final climate bill will include construction of new nuclear power plants:
Nuclear industry officials are seeking several times the $18.5 billion for new plant loan guarantees that Congress has already provided and the Energy Department plans to divide among a handful of companies soon.
...Elsewhere, Lieberman cited increased streamlining of the new reactor licensing process, nuclear work force development and support for waste recycling technologies.
Kerry, Graham and Lieberman view the Chamber of Commerce letter to Senators Boxer and Inhofe as "essential."
Kerry, Graham and Lieberman touted a letter sent yesterday to Boxer and Inhofe from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that spelled out in greater detail where it stands on the climate bill. Kerry called the chamber's letter "essential." And Graham said the group mirrors many Senate Republicans who are not quite sure where they stand on the issue.
"The chamber letter sort of reflects where a lot of people are," Graham said. "This sounds intriguing."
The Chamber's "essential" letter, which "mirrors" and "reflects" the views of a "lot of people," includes what might be considered the Chamber's terms or wish list of provisions for climate change legislation. Some of these terms focus on enabling increased use of the existing fossil fuel systems under a more corporate palatable system that streamlines permitting while protecting against regulations and litigation:
The Chamber agrees with a great deal of the principles set forth by Senators Kerry and Graham, in particular that legislation should: minimize the impact on major emitters; reduce price volatility for consumers; protect global competitiveness; invest in renewable energy sources; take advantage of nuclear power; streamline the permit system; make us the "Saudi Arabia of clean coal" by fostering carbon capture and sequestration technology; commit to increased environmentally responsible onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration; contain consumer and intellectual property protections; protect against agency regulation under existing laws not written for greenhouse gases; strengthen the hand of our international negotiators; and increase our own energy security and energy efficiency.
...The Chamber will continue to oppose bad policies that resemble the failed climate proposals of the past, such as bills that jeopardize American jobs, create trade inequalities, leave open the Clean Air Act, open the door to CO2-based mass tort litigation, and further hamper the permitting process for clean energy.
An additional clue is provided by the Chambers' endorsement of proposals offered by a string of senators. RLMiller provided a handy summary of these "good ideas:"
* Alexander: "100 nuclear plants," no cap on carbons
* Barrasso: "pledges to fight cap and trade"
* Baucus: wants to weaken cap on emissions
* Bingaman: cosponsor of Mark Udall's nuclear power bill, chair of committee that passed weak renewable energy bill ACELA
* Cantwell: alternative non-cap-and-trade bill, praised by Exxon Mobil but scorned by environmentalists, has virtually no impact on carbon emissions by 2020 when scientists say it's most needed
* Dorgan: praises ACELA, opposed to cap-and-trade
* ...Murkowski: open to idea of Kerry-Boxer bill, as long as nuclear power and oil drilling are expanded, leaving one to wonder how more oil drilling is supposed to reduce carbon?
What else might the Chamber like to see in a good bipartisan climate change bill? A Siegel wrote a piece in 2008 that reviewed some of the proposals by the Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy that present "some elements to praise," but also "these documents lay out a reckless vision for the future that represent an absolutely inadequate response to Global Warming."
A Siegel selected some key words related to fossil fuel pollution and climate change implications that one might expect to be covered in documents with proposals addressing global warming and did a search of the proposals for these terms. None of the documents included these key terms: externalities, mercury, acidification, extinction, drought, temperature, coral, or wildfire. As A Siegel concluded:
Very simply, it is hard to imagine how any serious discussion of energy issues can not have any accounting or discussion of these sort of key issues and implications from fossil fuel pollution.
One part of this "dual track" is the Kerry/Boxer bill that was approved today but needs to move forward. Senator Baucus, chair of Finance Committee with jurisdiction to approve the legislation, voted against the climate bill today because the Inhofe boycott prevented the committee from amending the bill, but he wants to see the Kerry/Boxer bill move forward:
Baucus explained that he still wanted to help the bill win 60 votes on the floor, and he expected to play a large role going forward as chairman of the Finance Committee and as a senior member of the Agriculture panel.
"This is a first step," Baucus told reporters. "There will be many other steps."
Yet, Baucus has previously indicated that he won't focus on climate change until health care is completed.
And so the climate change clock keeps ticking while DC dithers on climate change legislation:
Meanwhile, the burning of coal and oil is killing 20,000 Americans each year and costing $120 billion annually. The United States spends a billion dollars a day on imported oil. Georgia's recent $250 million flood was so "epic" and "stunning," the U.S. Geological Survey says "the flood has defied its attempts to define it." Tropical cyclones are battering Nicaragua, Vietnam, and the Philippines, killing over a thousand people and forcing the evacuation of "more than 115,000 people." "The severity of climate change impacts," 18 national scientific organizations told the U.S. Senate last month, "is expected to increase substantially in the coming decades."
UPDATE: (h/t RLMiller) Senator Boxer stated that the Kerry/Graham/Lieberman measure might be an amendment to the Kerry/Boxer bill approved today by her committee:
Senate Democrats on a key committee on Thursday ignored a Republican boycott and pushed a climate bill through by a 11 to 1 vote. But the committee chairman also noted that she's willing to amend the bill to make it more palatable and to get the 60 votes needed to pass the full Senate.
Sen. Barbara Boxer specifically cited the compromise approach floated on Wednesday by Republican Lindsey Graham, Democrat John Kerry and independent Joseph Lieberman.
"This bill is already being worked on by Senators Kerry, Lieberman, Graham and others," she said in a press release.