The House passed "American Clean Energy and Security Act" marked the first time comprehensive global warming legislation has passed either chamber. The bill reduces greenhouse gas pollution 17% by 2020 and 83% by 2050.
Since the House bill's passage, Big Energy and other special interests have spent millions of smelly energy dollars trying to block energy reform with claims of ensuing job losses and tax increases. The GOP has dutifully joined in with cries of a "national energy tax," thereby stoking the fears of moderate "brown dog" Democrats, many of whom have supported climate legislation in the past.
Fast forward to the Senate's version of a climate bill, scheduled for a July 26th release (RLMiller's diary of today provides a detailed description of the Senate legislation, including a spot-on conclusion that the bill is a solid, workable step in the right direction).
As it stands, the aforementioned Democratic Senators have expressed concerns about the climate bill's impact on manufacturing sector jobs and the potential for increased costs/taxes being passed on to consumers.
JOBS
The American Recovery and Investment Act (Stimulus Bill) included 71 billion dollars for clean energy programs and 20 billion in clean energy tax incentives. According to the World Resources Institutes, every investment of 1 billion in clean energy programs creates 5,000 more jobs than does traditional infrastructure spending.
Stimulus Bill tax incentives that provide up to 50 billion for companies that invest in clean energy, 25 billion to companies that manufacture fuel efficient vehicles, and 30 billion to small businesses that make their facilities more energy efficient, will be extended in the Senate Climate Bill.
Note to Senators: President Obama has successfully demonstrated, via the passage of the Stimulus Bill, that clean energy and jobs creation go hand in hand.
TAXES
If a carbon cap is included in the climate bill, the average household cost per year is estimated to be $175. This would be offset by tax credits and the dedication of 12% of revenues to low-income families.
Additionally, President Obama's proposed 2011 budget calls for cutting tax breaks for 12 oil, gas, and coal producers. The proposed elimination of Big Oil subsidies alone would save an estimated 45 billion over 5 years.
Note to Senators: Tax subsidies for Energy and Utility companies spend federal dollars and should be held to the same standards as other forms of government spending.
In conclusion, I think several Democratic Senators, despite their expressed skepticism about portions of the climate bill, are worthy of our attention and enlightenment. Please contact them as soon as possible, especially if you are a constituent.
Stabenow- League of Conservation Voters Score 100
Harkin- 100
Levin- 100
McCaskill- 91
Lincoln- 82
Pryor- 100
Dorgan- 100
Conrad- 82
Brown- 91
Webb- 100
Senator Ben Nelson? Not so much. Let's hope that he will soon take his steaming pile and head home to Nebraska.