Kerry's Office: Drilling will help get 60 Votes for Climate Legislation

[Blaukraut]

And there you have it. JK is going along.

Kerry spokesperson Whitney Smith emails:

“President Obama once again today reaffirmed his commitment to passing comprehensive energy and climate legislation.

“In the difficult work of putting together a 60 vote coalition to price carbon, Senator Kerry has put aside his own long-time policy objections and been willing to explore potential energy sources off our coasts as part of a suite of alternative solutions. He and his colleagues are committed to find acceptable compromises on onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration, conducted in an environmentally sensitive manner that protects the interests of the coastal states.

“They’ve met with Senators who oppose drilling and those who support it and they’ve worked for months to determine the best solutions.”



http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/climate-change/kerrys-office-drilling-will-help-get-60-votes-for-climate-legislation/

[MH1]

1. I was annoyed at first but I think JK et al are being realistic

and getting what they can while they can.

Face it if elections 2010 are a bloodbath for Dems then it will be much, much worse later, and any drilling will go further than this compromise.

I felt better when I heard that this IS in exchange for support on energy and climate legislation, AND there will be some more environmentally-sensitive areas closed. Face it, a lot of damage has already been done in the areas they are going to open up more, and I guess this comes under the heading of "picking your battles".

Not happy but I do believe if JK was involved in crafting a compromise, it's the best we can get under the circumstances.

[Mass]

2. The question is "60 votes for what?"

If the rumors are true (and nobody said they were not), they have already given up a lot for very little return. This is only one last straw (and in this case a straw that is probably more symbolic than anything, given that it is not clear oil produced offshore would be competitive now, and therefore oil companies may not even be interested drilling.

Honestly, the real issue is whether the bill will be helpful. And it is not clear for me that it will be.

[beachmom]

11. Yup. AND, I fear a Dick Cheneyesque energy bill now.

A bunch of giveaways to fossile fuel companies and little reduction in carbon. A meaningless gesture to renewable energy.

But honestly, we've been following this closely for months, and it's not like it was going that great before Obama made his announcement. Frankly, I'm not really all that surprised by it.

[Blaukraut]

3. I honestly don't know what to think anymore

On the one hand I get what Obama is trying to do - take away the repubs' weapons and defang them, but if that means that any legislation passed will be so heavily compromised and weighted with repub ideas, then what is the point? We might as well cut out the middleman (Obama and Dems) and go to the repubs directly.

The only way this is going to be effective will be if, despite using repub ideas, the legislation will still be helpful overall and not damaging. A fine line to tread, and I'm not sure that it can be done every time.

[karynnj]

8. I think the difference is

that for the most part, the Republicans have no interest in constraining carbon and a significant number don't believe there is man made climate change. They would do all "the Republican parts" and none of the Democratic parts.

What is left to see is how well the Democratic parts have been maintained.

Here Obama (and Kerry) are in an unenviable place. They see doing something to lower carbon now as an imperative - and the country is more against doing anything, if it has any economic impact than for doing it. This is a worse position than where we started on healthcare. The question is whether the bill they find 60 votes for is better than what could be done through the EPA. (One down side of doing it through regulations is that you have no flexibility in compensating parts of the country hurt by the plan.)

[fedupinBushcountry]

4. I know

my 2 Senators (Webb and Warner)are for it. It took up almost the whole front page of our newspaper today. Repubs win another with their "drill baby drill". Sigh!

[wisteria]

5. I feel this is a simplistic answer to a complex problem, but many American's

think this is at least part of the answer-in time, they will come to realize we need to do more than just drill. But, for now, I am willing to suck it up and go with drilling. I am curious to see just how much we really gain from this.

[karynnj]

6. It's not even a real solution - in that there is not enough oil to make the

US independent, nor is there enough to change the international price for something which is a commodity. I wonder if this only happens if the comprehensive bill is passed. If not, it is not clear how doing this brings people to the bill.

I still don't see how we get 60, but obviously there are people who have not spoken either way. This really is too important to fail to do anything on, but if this drilling is allowed and either no bill or a bill that does not reduce carbon is passed, it hurts rather than helps.

(the map now makes sense - Here is R.L. Miller's diary on the expansion of drilling, something he disagrees with. He has been an incredible blogger on climate change. http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/3/31/852656/-Huge-offshore-oil-expansion-in-the-name-of-clean-energy-Updated

[Mass]

7. Thanks karyn, this is an excellent post.

I had forgotten that there were already studies made for VA, so drilling could start sooner (or not, once again, depending on profitablity).

This is why I am not sure the proposal is more than a PR coup, but, even then, the problem is that it muddies the waters of what matters or not to solve climate change.

Inhofe had a release to answer the proposal that makes the point clearly:

http://washingtonindependent.com/81079/no-typo-inhofe-praises-obamas-energy-plan

It also appears President Obama is caught in a contradiction: the President is, on the one hand, pushing forward with global warming policies to make fossil fuels more expensive, while on the other hand, he’s talking about drilling for more fossil fuels offshore. How does the President square these two policies?

Why do you want to make fuel less expensive, if the solution to global climate change is to price carbon. It is the contradiction that is the problem.

[karynnj]

9. As were all of yours

I think I agree with your past posts more than I do with my own. I am not as optimistic as I was before, but will wait to see the bill. Miller's diary is excellent and puts many things in perspective. I completely trust Kerry's motivation and skill, but see that much can go wrong in the bill. The one thing clear is that it will be bipartisan - it has to be.

[beachmom]

10. I'm loving my Twitter today. Excellent sarcasm:

From Grist:

I'll trade you my bike for your skateboard. To show I'm sincere, here's my bike. I look forward to getting your skateboard next week!

Like that's going to work!!

:banghead:

I don't think he's going to get 60 votes. But now we've sold the store!! Whoopee!!!!!!!

[beachmom]

12. Two Senators have now condemned the announcement:

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/climate-change/senator-merkley-hits-drilling-decision-deeply-concerned/

Jeff Merkley and Frank Lautenberg.

Why is Kerry going against what he believes in in pursuit of 60 phantom votes that don't exist? Frankly, this is actually going to hurt the environmental flank in the Senate (I think "left" is an improper term as this is not so much a left/right issue). Some may say they will no longer approve the bill with having to take lumps like this.

Here's a more thorough round up of Senate reaction to offshore drilling announcement. Pretty depressing when Inhofe is praising it:

http://senatus.wordpress.com/2010/03/31/senators-react-to-obama-offshore-drilling-proposal/

[ProSense]

13. The announcement that put the climate change bill front and center

Of course, this isn't going to be the only issue that Dems are going to have to deal with. Remember the 14 coal Senators?

This is going to be interesting.

[karynnj]

14. Here is an article that is more tentative - where Kerry is said to be open to considering backing it

Sen. John Kerry, who is leading the effort to craft a climate bill in the Senate, said Wednesday that he would consider supporting President Barack Obama's decision to expand offshore oil and gas drilling.

Kerry's (D-Mass.) spokesperson Whitney Smith said that the move could help him attract the 60 votes necessary to move climate legislation through the Senate.
(same Smith quote as the other article)

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/90061-kerry-endorses-obama-drilling-plan

(There is no statement on his website)




Rereading the Plumline comment from Smith, her comment does NOT say definitively that Kerry supports the Obama plan. It simply says what has been said before that Kerry has shown openness - that he didn't in the past - to allow some OFS drilling if it was what was needed to get 60 votes.