The League of Conservation Voters has sent a a letter to Congress in support of the 1201-page Waxman-Markey bill, H.R. 2454:
In light of the tremendous importance of this legislation, LCV has made the unprecedented decision that we will not endorse any member of the House of Representatives in 2010 election cycle who votes against final passage of this historic bill. |
And 29 other environmental groups have sent their own letter:
On behalf of the millions of members and volunteers that our organizations represent, we write to urge you to support final passage of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES).
We also urge you to do everything possible to strengthen the bill between now and final passage, and along its journey to the President’s desk.
ACES will help build America’s clean energy economy and launch the United States’ first national plan of action to address the growing threat of climate change. ...
We believe this is one of the most important votes of our time. There are rare moments in American history when the urgency to act is clear, the stakes are high, the costs of inaction are untenable, and the need for courageous leadership is paramount. Now is one of those moments. An opportunity like this may not come again for many years. |
While others also think this is one of the most important votes of our time, they're not happy with what has happened to ACES as it now stands in the House of Representatives.
Friends of the Earth states:
Congress is poised to squander a historic opportunity to move closer to a clean energy future. The energy and climate bill moving through the U.S. House is based on a proposal from a group that includes Shell Oil, the coal-burning utility Duke Energy, and other corporate polluters. These firms — as well as Wall Street traders who call the bill’s carbon markets a "huge playground" where "bucks [will] be made" — are backing the bill.
There's a simple reason polluting and irresponsible corporations support the Waxman-Markey bill: It showers them with hundreds of billions of dollars, but doesn't require them to reduce pollution fast enough to avoid devastating climate change impacts.3 Worse, the bill guts the EPA’s preexisting authority to use the Clean Air Act to reduce this pollution.4 That means the bill is actually counterproductive — enacting it into law would be a step backward. What we need from Congress is much stronger legislation that puts us on a path to the clean energy future President Obama talked about during his campaign.
An energy bill written by corporate polluters is not a solution. |
A Siegel, who regularly posts on energy issues at Daily Kos and writes at his own blog, Get Energy Smart NOW!, states:
With the President’s statement. yesterday supporting ACES and Al Gore’s telecon last night, these two quite prominent climate activists seem to fall into the "vote for it even though it falls far short of what we’ve called for in the past" camps. Obama, after all, called for 100% auction of carbon permits while ACES gives away 85% initially (and most for a decade +). Gore called for an end to coal, while ACES gives it renewed life, and called for 100% clean electricity with a decade while ACES has a poorly structure renewable energy & energy efficiency standard of 17 percent by 2020. Thus, they are supporting a bill that is weaker than what they have called for.
This is true, in essence, for every single one of the environmental organizations ‘involved’ in the Washington game. It is hard to seen any serious "environmentalist" who sees ACES as the bill that they would like to see. The question becomes, at some point, how weakened it can become and still merit support. |
The problem with the call for strengthening the bill is that the amendments that have added 255 pages to the 946-page bill that emerged from committee have weakened it to make it more palatable to certain Democrats, Collin Peterson, who would otherwise vote against it. In other words, any eco-group with an alert team of legislative advocates knows that the bill is unlikely to be strengthened.
The deadline for submitting any strengthening amendments is 9:30 a.m. EDT Thursday.
And we haven't even got to the Senate yet, where ConservaDems play the same role as Blue Dogs in the House.
As Chris Bowers has pointed out:
Without a hardline group of progressives willing to join with Republicans and defeat Democratic legislation unless that legislation meets certain progressive criteria, every legislative fight will follow this process of backroom deals with corporate interests resulting in an inexorable right-wing slide. Further, this group of progressives, which I call a Progressive Block (and yes, the "k" is intentional), needs to publicly draw clear lines in the sand long before draft legislation is introduced. Such public announcements allow the netroots and grassroots to help organize around the line in the sand. Otherwise, given the backroom nature of these dealings, there is no way for the progressive activist base to play any meaningful role in the legislative process, and all negotiation power is ceded to corproate lobbyists.
= = =
The rescue begins below and continues in the jump.
Contributing Editor Devilstower gave us a pregame about an upcoming essay of his in Help bring Obama to the mountaintop...: "or more properly, to where the mountaintops used to be. The destructive practices of mountaintop removal are taking place less than six hours outside of Washington, D.C. and there's no reason Presdent Obama should not confront the situation directly. This Sunday I'll have a front page post with one message: Mr. President, come to Appalachia and see for yourself."
= = =
The Overnight News Digest is posted. Included is the story: Health Insurance Insider: 'They Dump the Sick'.
A Siegel wrote "Sources say": ... Are "greens" seeking to stop strengthening climate bill?: "There is a real debate among those concerned about climate change about the best path forward in terms of the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act. Some say kill it unless it is better. Others say fight to strengthen it. Some say SUPPORT and, well, ask for it to be strengthened. And, there is reason to believe that there are "greens" fighting to pass it, no matter what, and working to stop any efforts to strengthen it in a meaningful fashion."
Jan Barry wrote about Pete Seeger's current tour in Clearwater Legacy: "The inspiration for this hearty brand of environmental activism is a 90-year-old guy who still tramps around with a banjo singing old-fashioned folk songs. In recent weeks, Seeger has energized hand-clapping, standing audiences of all ages in singing grassroots movement songs at a jam-packed high school auditorium in White Plains, NY; the annual Clearwater Festival/Great Hudson River Revival in Croton Point Park; a 90th birthday bash and star-studded Clearwater fundraiser at Madison Square Garden in New York —not to mention, leading the television-watching nation in singing "This Land Is Your Land" at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., during the inauguration celebration for President Obama. When folk singer Pete Seeger and some friends launched the Clearwater project in 1969, the Hudson River was an open sewer for industries, cities and towns along its majestic sweep from the Adirondack Mountains to New York Bay. In the years since, the full-sail sight of the Clearwater sloop tacking up and down the river with a pickup crew of excited kids and adults has been paced by outbursts of activism on shore that has prodded cleanups and publicly targeted the major sources of pollution."
Jimbo47 opined that the Supreme Court's ruling essentially tells the Clean Water Act to SCOTUS to the Clean Water Act: DROP DEAD: "...as I was perusing my Tuesday New York Times I happened to stumble over this little tidbit, buried unobtrusively below the fold on page 16: The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the Clean Water Act does not prevent the Army Corps of Engineers from allowing mining waste to be dumped into rivers, streams and other waters.
chapter1 found More Proof US is Warming -- From Global Warming Deniers: "One of the many ways we measure temperature is with thermometers. Many of these thermometers are attached to a large network of 1000+ weather stations located throughout the US. Some of these show lower temps than those in the vicinity (someone located them just west of a tree, which blocks the sun) while others show higher temps (built nearby a parking lot, which absorbs sun). Now, a new 'study' has shown that the overall, these differences cancel out. That is, the best-located stations show precisely the same temperature trends as the set of all stations. Amazingly, this 'study' was carried out by a team of dozens (hundreds?) of Global Warming Deniers."
Adama D Brown took a well-aimed shot at The George Bush/Chris Lee energy plan: "Congressman Chris Lee announced his 'energy solutions' plan yesterday at a press conference in front of a local ethanol plant. Of course it's not really his plan: it's the 'American Energy Act' put forward by the House Republicans. I'm not sure whether Lee is ashamed of carrying water for the far right wing of his party, or if he simply doesn't want people to find out the actual details of the 'plan' he's pushing. For instance, the fact that it would legally ban any attempts to prevent or regulate climate change and global warming. Or that it gives billions of dollars in new subsidies to the oil and coal industries. Of course, Lee doesn't admit to any of that on his website, not even the fact that this is a rehash of the same old game. He's out there pushing it as his own, right down to using the same 'all of the above' talking point that the GOP sent out with the folders."
Stranded Wind took a dim view of the plan by California to Slaughter Pound Pooties/Woozles: "California's budget crisis is getting into everything, but the latest move is heart rending. The state currently mandates a six day stay at the shelter for any animal taken in before it can be euthanized. The state will save an estimated $23 million by cutting that time down to a mere three days."