House passes climate bill

Source: CSPAN

I have no print material to quote. Just watched the vote on CSPAN. It passed 219-212, with 44 Dems voting against (versus 30 who voted against bringing it to the floor this morning) and 8 Reps voting for it (versus none who voted to bring it to the floor).

No link yet.

I'd say it must be a better bill than it is being credit for.

House narrowly passes climate change bill

By Physics Today on June 26, 2009 3:50 PM

On Friday, the Democrats narrowly won passage in the House for the 1200-page American Clean Energy and Security Act by a 217-205 votes. The bill calls on the US to cut production of greenhouse gases by 17% of 1990 levels by 2020 and 83% by mid-century. Currently US greenhouse gas emissions are rising on average by 1% each year.

Despite statements on both sides of the aisle insisting that they want to combat climate change, a number of Republicans and Democrats have been mounting a rear-guard action to weaken the bill, particularly in its long and convoluted passage through the House Energy and Commerce committee.

The outcome depends on locking in the so-called “Blue Dog Democrats” and the number of moderate Republicans—despite pressure from republican leadership to kill the bill.

President Obama personally called a number of representatives to get passage of the bill after it looked like it would’t pass the chamber. On Thursday he called it "a vote of historic proportions ... that will open the door to a clean energy economy" and green jobs." Obama did not mention climate change in his speech, but the dangers of US “dependence on foreign oil.” Thirty Democrats, concerned about being labeled tax hikers in next years district elections, still voted against it.

more:
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/politics/2009/06/house-narrowly-passes-climate.html


Obama: Obama on Historic Energy Bill

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hu9VYhhB9T8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs%2Ephysicstoday%2Eorg%2Fpolitics%2F2009%2F06%2Fhouse%2Dnarrowly%2Dpasses%2Dclimate%2Ehtml&feature=player_embedded

Final passage was 219-212.

Everybody cheer!!! Let's all hope it passes the Senate so that we can all pay twice what we're paying now to heat our homes!!! Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!! We don't need the money we work for.....please, please, please.....oh pretty please double our heating bills!!!!!!! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

.. then it's a good bill. But..

The Cap and Trade part is an big unknown (we have no News Media or Reporters able to communicate) ... and they are loading this bill up with pork and secret mandates. Already over 1600 pages....

Learn to adapt.

Here's another link:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124602039232560485.html#mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular

* JUNE 26, 2009, 8:09 P.M. ET

House Passes Landmark Climate Bill
By GREG HITT and STEPHEN POWER

WASHINGTON -- Landmark legislation to curb U.S. greenhouse gas emissions was approved by the House of Representatives in a close vote late Friday, securing a hard-fought victory for a cornerstone of President Barack Obama's agenda.

The House of Representatives is set to vote on legislation to cap greenhouse gases. Opponents say it would put the U.S. at a disadvantage relative to countries like China and would damage the U.S. economy, Steve Power reports.

The 1,200 page bill—formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act"—will reach into almost every corner of the U.S. economy. By putting a price on emissions of common gases, such as carbon dioxide, the bill would affect the way electricity is generated, how homes and offices are designed, how foreign trade is conducted and how much Americans pay to drive or to heat their homes.

The House climate bill, approved by a 219 to 212 vote Friday evening, seeks to boost a number of nascent industries, such as wind-generated electricity and solar power. It would mandate that 15% of the nation's electricity come from sources such as wind and solar power by 2020, potentially expanding the market and profit potential for investors in those sectors.

<snip>

And when energy rates skyrocket because of manipulation from traders in the cap and trade derivatives market (think of what Enron did to CA), people will get pissed and blame Democrats. We'll have to answer was it worth it for a possible 4% reduction in CO2 by 2020, and the answer will certainly be "no", especially when you consider the state of our economy and the provisions of this bill which declaw some of the Clean Air Act.

We desperately need to get the money out of politics. Until that happens, we are going to be stuck with massive corporate handouts masquerading as desired reform.

It's not as strong as I'd like, but it's better than nothing.

and is a step backwards --

Was opposed by . . .

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH

GREENPEACE

PUBLIC CITIZEN

P D A

------------------

Here's an article on it --

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090624/friends-earth-goes-it-alone-urges-no-climate-bill

“Corporate polluters including Shell and Duke Energy helped write this bill, and the result is that we’re left with legislation that fails to come anywhere close to solving the climate crisis,” Blackwelder wrote.

“Worse, the bill eliminates preexisting EPA authority to address global warming—that means it's actually a step backward.

“This exercise in politics as usual is a wholly unacceptable response to one of the greatest challenges of our time, and it endangers the welfare of current and future generations. … If the ‘political reality’ at present cannot accommodate stronger legislation, their first task must be to expand what is politically possible—not to pass a counterproductive bill.”

That position hasn’t been easy hasn't been easy to take. Some of the largest environmental groups, including NRDC and EDF, were involved with Shell and Duke in the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a consortium that wrote the industry-environment compromise that the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) bill is based on. Groups that have questioned the legislation have been pressured to back off.

Blackwelder has also been pressured to support the bill, as well as to delay releasing an FOE report that looked into Wall Street’s expectations for the bill's cap-and-trade program and the high potential for gaming and corruption in a carbon-trading system.

Two other things to note something's going on with Rep. Henry Waxman - the former hero
who toppled the tobacco companies --

The House climate bill took another hit this week as Rep. Henry Waxman made further concessions ....

When Reps. Waxman and Ed Markey accepted U.S. CAP’s compromise as the foundation for their climate bill, they set the bar too low, Blackwelder said.

“If you’re going to deal from a low point, it’s only going to go lower. Now, we’ve got a deal that will basically eviscerate biofuels standards," he said, referring to the latest concessions for farm-state Democrats. "It’s just one thing after another.”

“We’re going to stand up for what the science calls for and point out the flaws.”


And this new example of GOP insane propaganda . . .

Newt Gingrich’s American Solutions group launched a fear mongering ad with footage of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse. Boehner, who has succeeded so far in keeping House Republicans toeing his line, sent the Republicans a memo saying that anyone who voted for the ACES bill, including Democrats, did so at their own peril:

“The American people will remember this debate and will remember who stands up for them.”

It's a crappy piece of legislation and if Democrats are saddled with it, there's going to be a political price to pay.

There's nothing I like about it, it was voted on unread and it will cost us dearly.

final step, though.

Nevertheless, the majority of environmental activists -- even those outside government -- say the time for legislation is now or never. Carl Pope, head of the environmental giant Sierra Club, has also been twisting the arms of undecided liberals, arguing that by holding out support for the bill they're strengthening the hand of moderate and conservative Democrats who want to push the bill right.

"If Waxman-Markey can't get the votes of reliable liberals, they are then forced to go to the right to get a majority," Pope told the Huffington Post. The bill that has emerged isn't as strong as it could be, he said, because of the "impact of the failure of liberals to commit on the bill."

And while admitting that the final package had flaws, Pope said that the Sierra Club is still unequivocally supporting passage.

I don't know if that info. was on TV - does anyone know? If they did do that, can broadcasters legally do that? I now Fox does a lot questionable, but if they did something that obvious, can we complain?