Why did climate legislation fail? Because that is what the American people wanted:

[beachmom]

Must read by Kevin Drum.

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/06/rip-climate-legislation

R.I.P. Climate Legislation

Today probably marks the official death of climate legislation in the United States. Lindsey Graham, the only Republican even nominally favorable toward any kind of carbon pricing plan, has announced that he can't support the Kerry-Lieberman bill because it doesn't allow enough offshore drilling (!), and without Graham there's pretty much zero chance of getting any further Republican support.

So the odds of passing climate legislation,already slim, have now dropped to zero. The only option left is a pure energy bill, something that accomplishes very little, and accomplishes that little solely by offering up subsidies to every special interest you can imagine.

Drum goes on to cite this NYT op-ed which goes into polling data showing that the American people, despite all of the climate denier publicity, the American people DO think global warming is real AND that it is man made.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/opinion/09krosnick.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

The op-ed is an argument against voting for the Murkowski amendment, so it is good news. Unfortunately, the American people oppose cap & trade or a carbon tax. They want incentives to be given to companies to reduce carbon emissions. So basically, we HAVE won the argument on whether global warming is real, but where we have fallen flat is explaining the ECONOMICS of why carbon needs to be priced.

Kevin Drum ends:

So there you have it: the American public believes in global warming and wants the government to do something about it. However, the American public doesn't want to do anything — carbon taxes or cap-and-trade — that might actually work. But they do want to open the federal goody bag and dole out subsidies and tax breaks to everyone under the sun, presumably because these all sound like pleasant things to do and they're under the impression that they're all "free." Whether they work or not isn't really on their radar.

And it looks like that's what Congress is going to deliver. We are, in this case, getting exactly the government we deserve. A government of children.1

1Yes, I'm feeling bitter about this at the moment. Anyone have a problem with that?

Well, complaining about the voters has never gotten us anywhere. I just think that we haven't really had a debate about why the price of fossil fuels need to go up to solve the problem (while people are rebated that money back to spend elsewhere so it doesn't slow down the economy).

[ProSense]

1. I don't buy Drum's argument. Here's why

GOP Senators Uniting Around Alternative Climate Bill

I don't think this process is being driven by Americans. Like health care, the attempts to kill the climate bill are being driven by special interests.

[beachmom]

2. Where is the movement to force legislators to ignore special interests?

OT, but listen to this discussion on climate change live:

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/features/moving-by-degrees/live-video-event.html

Edit: yeah, I know they're all supporting the Lugar bill. So what? They're trying to show they're for SOMETHING. Meanwhile, nothing will happen.

[ProSense]

4. There isn't one.

Still, that doesn't mean legislators will not or should not act or that they're going to wait for demands from Americans.

As for Lugar's bill, yeah it's an act, but the media will still refer to it as a climate change bill.

[Mass]

3. Lugar's bill is not a climate bill . Some of its measures are fine, but it relies on the market.

I think, however, that we are talking of a lack of leadership by the Democratic leadership. Everybody ran away from climate change and started to float other rational for the bill (jobs, security, energy independence).

Once the rational for taxing carbon was lost, there was no reason to fight for it and this is what many Democrats and Republicans did. I feel sorry about that, but it was obvious.

[ProSense]

5. No, it isn't a climate bill, but

it's being called a climate bill. Given that so many people tend to wait until the last minute to voice approval or disapproval of any bill, I expect the media to hype this as as an alternative.

How the hell did the Murkowski bill get this far without a push back from anyone? The Center for Biodiversity has been spending its time mischaracterizing the Kerry bill and ignoring the potentially damaging legislation.

[beachmom]

6. Smorgasbord?

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/09/09greenwire-senate-climate-bills-boosters-try-smorgasbord-68212.html

Senate Climate Bill's Boosters Try Smorgasbord Strategy in Bid for Votes

Advocates for a comprehensive energy and climate bill are scrambling to find the Senate votes they need by stitching together ideas from a variety of existing and fast-surfacing proposals.

...

The Obama administration and its allies on Capitol Hill have settled on what is being called a "buffet strategy" to find 60 votes they need to get a bill done before a new Congress comes in next January.

...

Several legislative ideas are already on the table for them to choose from: Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) have the "American Power Act (pdf)" to cap greenhouse gases; Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) produced a bill (pdf) last June with a nationwide renewable energy standard; Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) have an alternative "cap-and-dividend" approach (pdf) for pricing carbon emissions; and Sens. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are coming out today with a bill (pdf) that promotes energy efficiency while avoiding a mandatory price on carbon.

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told The New York Times yesterday that he is expecting to pluck ideas from each of the Senate proposals. "There's enough in each," he told the newspaper, for "a serious and comprehensive energy bill. And you can do it this year."

I don't know what to make of this.

Senate Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said yesterday she did not think the primary vehicle going to the floor would be the Kerry-Lieberman bill as it was introduced last month. "We never said that," she said. "We said Harry was going to write his own bill. Never that that would be the vehicle.

Kerry and Lieberman are fighting just to keep the carbon-pricing mechanism in the bill that kicks off the floor debate, rather than being forced to offer their ideas as an amendment. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) suggested the amendment route earlier this week during an MSNBC television interview but quickly retreated after he ignited a firestorm of complaints from Kerry, Lieberman and environmentalists who fear that strategy would make an already steep climb even harder.

Good God, Joe Lieberman is the fire breather here. Good for him:

"It's wrong as a matter of policy and what's best for the country," Lieberman said yesterday. "They ought to be together. If you put it on as an amendment, it's like we're a stepchild. Excuse me for that, because I have some stepchildren who I love. It's like we're not the main event. We're a sideshow. That's a better metaphor. If we can fight our way into the arena, great. But that's not where we are. We have to be at the center of the arena."

[MBS]

7. almost everything about Lieberman is annoying, EXCEPT on environment

His commitment to environmental issues is longstanding, and, as far as I can tell, actually real.

With what's going on in the Gulf -- an ecological tragedy of a scope that the area (animals as well as humans) may never recover from -- it's simply mind-boggling (not to mention infuriating) to watch the Senate try to weaken the bill, play political games with the bill, or downright reject this bill. :wtf: :mad:Can they really not connect the dots? Are they this short-sighted? Are they really this beholden to the oil lobby??? :thumbsdown:
Talk about fiddling while Rome (or the Gulf) burns. .if anything, there should be a rousing cry to TOUGHEN the bill, for Pete
sake. . UNBELIEVABLE.

I'm so proud that JK is pushing on this.

[Mass]

8. Boxer is right. The strategy was that he wrote a bill but the bill was to include Kerry-Lieberman

and Bingaman. The problem is that, as it stands, they want Bingaman alone.