The Globe is peeved at Sen. Kerry over CAFE standards

[TayTay]

Note: peeved is what happens when you get in your car to drive to work and notice that your son forgot to put gas in the car and now you gotta stop and fill up and this might make you late for work. Pissed is when you go outside and see that the side of your car has a brand new dent in it and your son can't recall how it happened. (Maybe the evil car fairies were out last night and attacked it while he was at his friend's house.)

Climate change no-shows
April 17, 2006

SINCE NEITHER Congress nor the Bush administration has shown any stomach for requiring automakers to make more efficient cars that produce less greenhouse gas, leadership has passed to the state of California. Since 1990, it has had the right to set higher auto emission standards, which other states can then adopt. California is proposing to mandate reductions of carbon dioxide, which 10 other states, including Massachusetts and New York, want to impose, too.

This effort deserves the support of senators from these states, especially such senators as John Kerry of Massachusetts and Hillary Clinton of New York who might be presidential candidates in 2008. Disappointingly, neither has signed on to a letter backing California's rule. Kerry's explanation -- that he favors nationwide regulation and is against patchwork rules -- sounds plausible but is a recipe for inaction given the refusal of the current Congress to act. Attempts to get an explanation from Clinton for her failure to sign were unavailing.

more at: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2006/04/17/climate_change_no_shows/

Ah, I think he should sign the letter.

[Mass]

1. I think he is right, but only if he rushes to offer a federal bill doing

that and challenges his colleagues who signed the letter to support it.

He is right that the issue deserves national attention, but what do we do?

[karynnj]

3. Can't he do both

I can see the Globe's point especially when they end with:

"The letter bears the names of most of the senators -- and all the Democrats except Kerry and Clinton -- from the 11 states. One signing senator is from a state not adopting the standards, John McCain of Arizona, who is also cosponsor of a bill with Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut that would curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

It is not a good sign for Democratic leadership on the issue of climate change that two of its leading potential presidential candidates in 2008 do not have their John Hancocks on the letter, and the leading potential Republican candidate does."

which really makes a good point. If McCain is the Republican candidate, it netralizes the environment issue - and if this could actually hurt Kerry or Clinton against McCain. (even though it is a half measure.)

[ProSense]

2. There is more

to this story. I remember something earlier about Kerry's national push related to this. I have to put my finger on it.

At least he's still pushing the national effort:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20060127180339-01354.pdf

[ProSense]

4. The Bush admin response

Includes responses to Kerry's and Waxman's questions:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20060302163005-57657.pdf

And the followup:

March 2, 2006

Dr. Paula Dobriansky
Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs
U.S. Department of State
2201 C St., NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Dr. Dobriansky:

Thank you for your February 13, 2006, response to our letter of January 27, 2006, regarding statements made by yourself and Dr. Harlan Watson, the heads of the U.S. delegation, at the conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol in Montreal, Canada last December. Our letter raised concerns about the statements that you and Dr. Watson made during the meetings about U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases. While you and Dr. Watson stated that U.S. emissions were falling due to President Bush’s approach to climate change, emissions have actually risen 3.5% during the Bush Administration and now are at the highest levels ever reported.

Your central claim in response to our letter is that what really matters is “greenhouse gas intensity,” or the amount of emissions per unit of economic production, not greenhouse gas emissions. Yet it is actual emissions that are warming the earth. The atmosphere does not distinguish between emissions produced from more or less efficient economic activity. The United States remains the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, our emissions are increasing rapidly, and under this Administration, U.S. emissions have hit their highest level ever.

The credibility of the United States is under attack around the world, as nations doubt our claims ranging from weapons of mass destruction to treatment of detainees. Selective and misleading presentation of information on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions trends simply aggravates this mistrust. Unsubstantiated claims that the Administration’s voluntary climate programs have reduced U.S. emissions can only further undermine the United States’ credibility with the rest of the world.

As you continue to meet with representatives of other nations regarding climate change, we urge you to ensure that U.S. statements on this topic are always based on the most recent, credible, scientific information, and have solid analytical support.

Sincerely,



Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member
House Committee on
Government Reform

John F. Kerry
U.S. Senator

[ProSense]

5. It was about Romney

not Kerry. I remembered it has to do with MA.

7 states sign emissions pact
Mass. legislators urge compliance
By Scott S. Greenberger, Globe Staff | December 21, 2005

Seven states moved forward without Massachusetts and signed a pact yesterday to reduce power plant emissions, but two state legislators are plotting an end-run around Governor Mitt Romney that would bring the Bay State into compliance with the deal.

After more than two years of helping to negotiate the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Romney abruptly pulled out last week, saying the initiative should include a strict limit on how much power plants would have to pay for the right to emit pollution. The Massachusetts governor said a cap is necessary to protect businesses and consumers from increases in energy costs. Governor Donald L. Carcieri of Rhode Island, a fellow Republican, declined to join for the same reason.

But environmentalists and officials from the other states say the pact was altered to address Romney's concerns.

Several critics said yesterday that Romney was motivated by politics, and that he switched his stance to curry favor with industry groups that might help him if he runs for president.

''The fact that Governor Romney's turnabout on RGGI occurred on the very day he announced he would not run again for governor, and the fact that his negotiators around the table were comfortable with the agreement we were reaching . . . suggests that it really was a matter of larger politics rather than policy," Bradley M. Campbell, commissioner of New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection, said yesterday in a conference call with reporters.

more...


http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/12/21/7_states_sign_emissions_pact/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+City/Region+News

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=273&topic_id=60737&mesg_id=60763