Climate Change hearing in the Finance committee tomorrow at 10 am

[karynnj]

Tuesday, November 10, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. in
215 Dirksen Senate Office Building



Member Statements:
Max Baucus, MT
Charles Grassley, IA

Witness Statements:

The following witnesses are scheduled to testify:

Mr. Abraham Breehey, Director, Legislative Affairs, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, Department of Government Affairs, Fairfax, VA

Ms. Carol Berrigan, Director, Industry Infrastructure, Nuclear Energy Institute, Washington, DC

Dr. Kenneth P. Green, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, DC

Dr. Margo Thorning, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist, American Council for Capital Formation, Washington, DC

Ms. Van Ton-Quinlivan, Director,Workforce Development and Strategic Programs, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, CA

http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/hearings.htm (web Live link here)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

As we get statements from Baucus and Grassley here - both not on board to say the least, I looked at the witnesses. The first is a union guy, but from a union that might be more connected to dirty energy than clean. (I hope I am surprised) A Nuclear guy, someone from AEI, which has demonized anything green. Then a woman from american council for capital formation - I knew nothing about them - so I goggled - the first part looked promising - but then there was the note that they got EXXON funding. http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/american_council_for_capital_formation.html All of these seem likely to be negative.

But, the last speaker is a woman from Pacific Gas & Electric - one of the companies Kerry has mentioned that left the Chamber of Commerce. So, I guess there is a little balance.

Gee - and I already disliked the smirky Senator Baucus, who voted against the Boxer bill in EPW. This will be a major challenge for Kerry as most of the Democrats - Baucus, Rockefeller, Lincoln, have been considered trouble here. So, this should be interesting to watch to see if Kerry can singlehandedly outduo the Chair, with the gavel, the ranking members and the rest of the Senators. This will be worse than where they were on health care. (Menendez better back him up well.)

[karynnj]

1. this is on the schedule for CSPAN (one)

[karynnj]

2. Listening - though I missed some because of a call

Dr Green (AEI) is as bad as could have been guessed. He claims he is an environmentalist by training, but that he picked up economics! Everything he has said on economics is pure right wing - again claiming that government can't create jobs.

Dr Thorning (AAF) says that most government models use macro-economics. The imput-output models don't take gas prices into consideration and are not dynamic. Their model shows a 1.7 to 2.0 decrease in GDP.

Recommend - drilling, nuclear, and getting clean coal. She makes one really bad assumption "If the US goes it alone, there will be little gain." She then concluded that the cost (higher than other studies) outweigh the benefits (assumed away).

Tom (PG&E) - (the only one on our side) - She is the workforce strategy director and she makes a great case for there being a large number of jobs.

Baucus asked Thorning about the many projections and comparing them to CBO and EPA, hers is much higher than the others. (Duh - look at her assumptions!) AND that is exactly what Baucus did - ask her about her assumptions. (answer - they were attached. She built in "realistic" assumptions on when new technology comes in place. She spoke of length of time to get nuclear up and clean coal. She thinks EPA was unrealistic.) Baucus says her projection is an outlier. Why? She said that they might say she constrained renewables too much.

Roberts (because he has an appointment) - He misuses work Micro - saying she had a macro model, but he'll speak of micro - Kansas. He says that cap and trade will cause Kansas to lose jobs. He spoke to people in Kansas. They rank high in oil and gas production and those industries invest in Kansas. He lists small towns with hard working people in oil refinery. He doesn't know what a green job is because it is not in the dictionary. He doesn't think we should favor green jobs. Claims bill will NOT lead to a cleaner environment. Thorning backed him up.

[karynnj]

4. Kerry

Kerry speaks of Siemins in Kansas and lists 6 studies that all show Kansas growing and getting jobs. Says that Baucus's question on assumptions is the key - puts a WP Dorn op-ed into record. Says they need to put price on carbon and set a clear policy. Kerry says that the studies presented are not credible. Acts what they will do to deal with lowering carbon. Points out that Thorning's assumed values are completely out of line and she has made comments that are not true. Claiming that EU's cap and trade is not working. Kerry cites their reduction in carbon (on target towards Kyoto) and jobs and economy increasing. He asks how can you have study that doesn't include any of the efficiencies.

"excellent questions" Repeats the that China and India will do nothing - Kerry "That's not true and he then spoke of China agreeing to do stuff and actually exceeding it." She criticizes models he quotes as not dynamic. Says she will add a Danish and a German study that solar and wind jobs are expensive. Kerry's response was that she did not answer the cost of inaction.

[Luftmensch067]

3. JK on now

Shoot, looked away for a couple of minutes and missed the beginning!

[karynnj]

5. He was great

She really is a hack and is hiding behind a complicated model - Baucus and Kerry are totally right when questioning the assumptions. They control the result and they seem out of line.

In response to Grassley, Mr. Abraham Breehey criticized the dooms day analyses of Thorning and Green (who is not an economist). He backed some of what Kerry said.

[karynnj]

6. Cantwell

She apparently has a proposal for how to do cap and trade. Green argues that the Sulfur dioxide comparison is wrong. Says it is not appropriate for greenhouse gases. Says they need full auction of permits to price them correctly.

[karynnj]

7. Stabanow

From a state good at making things - asks how to keep the manufacturing jobs in the US. Says if they do this well, we keep jobs; if poorly, we lose jobs.

We have the capacity to develop the technology to get the jobs.

[YvonneCa]

8. JK's next statement needs to be heard...

...by the whole country.True LEADERSHIP. THAT's how it's done. It's C-Span1, so it 'should' get MAJOR play.

[karynnj]

9. Wow - that ended with a fantastic slap down to Dr Green by Senator Kerry

Dr Green basically claimed that the impacts of a 2 % increase were mostly positive - and there was no problem until 3% and he didn't believe that it would get the high. He spoke of working to make ourselves more able to cope with the changes. He also made a statement that other counties (China singled out) don't do what they agree to do voluntarily - mentioning earlier accords.

Kerry first blew him away explaining that he was there in Rio in 1992, when George Bush negotiated a voluntary system which the US signed - spoke of how our carbon increased over the last 8 years more than in the 1990s. No one followed the voluntary goals.

He ended by establishing that Green's paper is not peer reviewed. Green challenged the Senator many times in his smug manner, but Kerry pretty much took him apart - even though Green has his doctorate in that field.

Must see TV

[YvonneCa]

10. Kyoto in1992...

...? Otherwise, a great summary. :) It was quite a slap down, but I always like the civil, diplomatic tone JK uses when he lays out the facts. It makes the 'slap down'that much more effective. :7

[Luftmensch067]

11. Agreed

He is always polite, but he gets that Righteous Fire of the TRUTH in his eyes and voice and says things like "That's not accurate. You have to be accurate." Looks mild in print, but has incredible power to pulverize. He does have something of a Jimmy Stewart as Mr. Smith effect when he gets in that mode, I must say!

[YvonneCa]

12. "...the incredible power to pulverize"...

...is perfect.PULVERIZE...that's what he does.:7

[Luftmensch067]

13. Makes me stand up and cheer every time.

:-)

[karynnj]

15. Jimmy Steward - he really does

Which is funny as Jimmy Steward is the epitome of the "regular guy" - something the media spun Kerry as the antithesis of.

[YvonneCa]

17. karynnj...

...It's Stewart, with a t. He was a great actor...we have to get his name correct.

[Luftmensch067]

18. Except I kind of like Steward when referring to JK!

He often acts as a steward of our national values and human decency in general!

[YvonneCa]

19. ...

... :7

[karynnj]

24. Spelling was never my strong suit

He really is a great actor.

[karynnj]

14. He mentioned both Kyoto (and Byrd/Hagel) and

the RIO one. Still, I captured only a faction of the issues and none of civil, diplomatic but devastating slap down. I think he really angered Kerry by his cavalier - "I read the report and I think we can go to 3% - just prepare people and make them more adaptable" arrogance.

[YvonneCa]

23. You are right. I watched again last night...

...without distractions :)...and he mentions both. What a good hearing! JK makes the important points in a way that is very easy to grasp.I hope someone posts the clip in GD and that C-Span replays this a lot.

[karynnj]

16. Archived link

http://cspan.org/Watch/Media/2009/11/10/HP/R/25735/Senate+Climate+Legislation+Shifts+Focus+to+Job+Opportunities.aspx

[TayTay]

20. Thanks to everyone for this wonderful thread

I was running around on errands today and couldn't watch this hearing. This summary makes me want to plunk myself down and watch the hearing. (I love those hearings where The Truth is front and center. There simply isn't a better person at these hearings than that particular, well-informed, Senator.)

Thank you all!

[ProSense]

21. I really enjoyed

the smack down

[beachmom]

22. Oh my god!!! Must see You Tube video of the smackdown:

http://climateprogress.org/2009/11/10/kenneth-green-american-enterprise-institute-aei/

Thanks, Karynnj and everyone else who watched the hearing and let us know what happened. The above video is the cliff notes. :) AWESOME.

[karynnj]

25. It was wonderful - the funny thing is that he is usually good and I've used the same words

This was incredible - I think for all but the ideologues (and AEI and Heritage will claim Kerry was a bully and wrong), AEI's expert was blown out of the water. (Green really was a very smug, self satisfied guy - it is not even clear that he recognized how badly Kerry destroyed him.)

His comments on making people and communities more resilient as a solution are ridiculous on the surface. Think of it, to avoid the costs that he and the right see in working to stay within 2 degrees, he proposes something that doesn't stop the problem , but would likely be incredibly expensive. What would it take to keep Manhattan and its infrastructure sufficiently above water? It's not the lack of resilience of New Yorkers that makes this hard to do, it is that Manhattan is an island that is not far above sea level in many parts.

[wisteria]

26. Milbank has a nasty write up in the WP on this. What is with the guy?

I am not going to copy any of it hear because he actually give a call out to the likes of Beck, Hannity and Dick Morris. He also is out of line with his comments about Kerry.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/10/AR2009111015034.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&at=u%3Dmargievogel%26t%3D1257995050%26e%3Dmargie.vogel%40comcast.net%26h%3DLM3HMMtjoe7FUK3UorB03Q%3D%3D

[beachmom]

27. Meh, I wouldn't get upset about it. It was an extraordinarily informationless column

even for Dana Millbank.

I had a good friend who insisted (nicely, not in a wild eyed way) that John Kerry and "that wife of his" wanted to create a one world government. I was so floored I didn't say anything. A lot of seemingly normal people believe in that crap.

The entire article is basically saying that the conspiracy theorists are nuts, and it was dumb for Kerry to bring the U.N. Secretary to the Senate because it will cause all the conspiracy theorists to come out of the woodwork. Okay .... stupid column.

[karynnj]

28. That was my take too

and the paragraph speaking of pictures of Kerry with Ban say that. But the fact is that it is rather sad that the head of the UN meeting with the SFRC could be seen as anything other than normal.

The problem is Milbank may need a :sarcasm: emoticon.

[karynnj]

29. This is likely why Green contradicted Kerry on the Himalaya Glaciers

(From a Grist twitter link) - http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2009/11/greenland_ice_and_himalayan_gl_1.html

Again Kerry is inline with the scientific community and Green with a poor, non peer reviewed study that makes its conclusion based on 25 out of 15,000 glaciers.

(Placed here, because as Green said it this is an AEI, thus RW, talking point and the article refutes it well. )