Kerry, Lieberman Willing To Scale Back Energy Bill To Get Republican Support

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The authors of sweeping energy legislation stalled in the Senate said Tuesday they were prepared to scale back their bill to get Republican support.

Sens. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman made the comments after meeting at the White House with fellow senators and President Barack Obama, who is pushing for action in the wake of the Gulf oil spill.

"We are prepared to scale back the reach of our legislation in order to try to find that place of compromise," Kerry, D-Mass., said after the meeting.

But the road to compromise looked anything but clear. Kerry, D-Mass., and Lieberman, I-Conn., said that during the meeting with Obama the president insisted the bill must include a price on the carbon emissions blamed for global warming - something that's anathema to many Republicans.

And when Republicans left the meeting they lambasted the approach, calling it a "national energy tax" they could never accept.

"If we want a clean energy bill, take a national energy tax off the table in the middle of a recession while we focus on the oil spill and focus on what we agree on," said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.

The climate bill by Kerry and Lieberman would tax carbon dioxide emissions produced by coal-fired power plants and other large polluters, as a way to reduce pollution blamed for global warming. The measure aims to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020 and by more than 80 percent by 2050.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is aiming to bring the bill to the Senate floor in July.

The bill's sole Republican backer, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, withdrew his support last month, saying it is impossible to pass the legislation in the current political climate.

Nonetheless Lieberman and Kerry said that some Republicans in Tuesday's meeting indicated openness to compromise. They declined to say who.

"As you know Sen. Graham helped us shape this bill. He still believes we have to price carbon. There are a group of Republicans who believe we have to price carbon. The question is how, and that's what we need to continue to work on," said Kerry.

The House passed its own measure last year.

---

Comments

[ReedYoung]

02:18 PM on 07/07/2010

My compliments, Mr. President. A national carbon tax means one thing: the CLEAR Act, sponsored by Senators Cantwell (D-WA) and Collins (R-ME).

http://www.capanddividend.org/?q=node/257
Its foremost advantage is simplicity: it’s less than 50 pages long (compared to about 1,500 for Kerry-Lieberman-Graham), it’s much easier than Kerry-Lieberman-Graham to understand, and would be far simpler to administer. For example, it requires no monitoring of smokestacks or verification of offsets in distant lands.

Another virtue of Cantwell-Collins is its transparency. Its permit auctions are competitive and open, and the public can readily see where all the revenue goes: 75% to everyone equally and 25% to climate-related programs. Moreover, because offsets are not allowed, financial shell games are virtually impossible. By contrast, it’s virtually impossible to tell where the money will go under Kerry-Lieberman-Graham, and financial shell games are as certain as oversized Wall Street bonuses.

A third advantage of Cantwell-Collins is its dividends. These guarantee that middle class families won’t be scre wed. Indeed, a majority of households in all states will come out ahead because their dividends will exceed their higher carbon costs. This will sustain consumer spending and spur our ailing economy. It will also retain popular support for a declining cap as carbon prices rise over time.

[joeneri]

12:04 PM on 07/01/2010

As long as this bill establishes in law the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, then it's a good bill.

[ReedYoung]

02:13 PM on 07/07/2010

True, but there's a better one already written.

[ginxy]

11:40 AM on 07/01/2010

Why don't they "water it down" with some dirty, dead, oil water from the gulf?

Our government is collectively guilty of reckless endangerment.

[ReedYoung]

02:19 PM on 07/07/2010

No, our corporate "persons," all our Republicans and, to be honest, just a handful of corporatist pseudo-Democrats are "collectively guilty of reckless endangerment."

[right Alice]

10:13 PM on 06/30/2010

By all means, why not 'oil it down' for them?

[rumsblogger]

04:39 PM on 06/30/2010

It's not too late for the Dem leadership to change strategy. They need to ditch the Kerry-Lieberman bill, with its giveaways and offsets, and promotion of offshore oil drilling.

The Cantwell-Collins CLEAR Act is a far better approach and it is the only bipartisan bill in the U.S. Senate with Republican support. It is a simpler approach that would create a carbon price and send the money back to every American as a dividend check. www.supportclearact.com

[mamacat]

02:51 PM on 06/30/2010

The GOPer politicians are not opposed to this bill because it is too strong, they are opposed to it because it was the Dems who proposed it.

The definition of "crazy" is sometimes taken to be doing the same thing, over and over again, in the hopes of getting a different result. The Dems need to figure out what is motivating the GOPers, and act accordingly.

[BrunswickGaDem]

11:27 AM on 06/30/2010

If the Repugnants take back the Senate, it will be interesting to see how often they're willing to "scale back" their agenda to accomodate the Democrats.

[right Alice]

10:20 PM on 06/30/2010

Exactly. Their alternating archetypes of Tyrant/Victim are predictably played.

[BrunswickGaDem]

11:22 AM on 06/30/2010

Nothing will be accomplished in the Senate, with respect to energy, the environment, or anything else until Democrats learn that they cannot negotiate with Repugnants. The only "compromise" acceptable to the GOBP is capitulation.

Why not a tax on energy? Those with the largest carbon footprint are doing the most damage and they should be footing more of the bill for what they do.

Why not a Manhattan type project to develop clean renewable energy sources. We are approaching, or we have already reached peak oil. We will reach, or have reached, a point where demand for oil far exceeds supply, with all of the concommitant social, political, and environmental problems that go with a feeding frenzy. Deepwater Horizon should be seen as a warning. As remaining reserves become more difficult to access, more disasters will become inevitable. BP is now planning to drill a well off the Alaska coast that would be over 2 miles deep (twice the depth of Deepwater Horizon-in worse conditions) and then run up to 6 miles horizontally. Their emergency plans for this well are no more adequate than those for Deepwater Horizon.

It's incredible that Repugs, and some Dems like Ben Nelson & Mary Landrieu, in the Senate are so bought and paid for by big oil, that they refuse to act like adults even when the survivablity of the planet is at stake. If the Repugnants threaten filibuster, let them filibuster and show the country whether they support the people or big oil.

[peteRed]

11:12 AM on 06/30/2010

unfortunately the change we can believe in has happened only in the executive. the legislative remained the same old place, where only the big private intere$t$ represented by both parties count.

I'm sick of politicians who ask for my vote and then go 4 years servicing the big lobby! and this happens all over the world. wake up people. this is what democracy looks like, a big fat political ponzi

[ForAmericaAndRoosevelt]

09:46 AM on 06/30/2010

Just remember, folks, our President up at that DOES know what he's doing, in that quiet, special way of his.

Rachel just made it official. As in, with facts and figures.

Best since Roosevelt.

Yes, you read that right.

Shouldn't we have, like, taken a moment or something?

I'll go look for the link again, I keep losing it.

[ForAmericaAndRoosevelt]

10:09 AM on 06/30/2010

* at the top

And here it is:

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/06/28/political_wire_on_the_rachel_maddow_show.html

I mean, I really just did not ever even think of imagining that I might see something like this in my lifetime.
I suppose, maybe somewhere at the back of my mind, I thought maybe, just maybe, he could, but I did not think it would really happen. And I had no idea what it would be like.

I mean, this is just really, really overwhelming. When did I ever think I would see a Roosevelt? A Lincoln? I feel like the 100-year-old who got to vote for him before she died.

Not such a good time for festivities, I guess. Maybe someday it can be a national holiday.

[billsmile]

08:17 AM on 06/30/2010

They'll water it down to the point where progressive Senators won't back it & then they'll blame progressives.

[MrUniteUs]

07:16 AM on 06/30/2010

We need more democrats in the Senate. We can make it happen in November.
Yes we can.

[richinkle]

07:22 AM on 06/30/2010

I am enthusiastically signing on with your against-all-odds optimism!

[mamacat]

02:52 PM on 06/30/2010

From your lips to God's ears.

[Longtimeliberal]

06:50 AM on 06/30/2010

Take away tax credits to oil compaies and then we have a free market. If we don't take advantage of this opportunity we will jeopardise our security, innovation and new jobs.

[dragonmaster]

06:14 AM on 06/30/2010

The GOP can water down every bill they want- and Obama out of desperation will sign it. Health care was passed- but its not really a good bill- it at least is a framework for the future.

Energy & Climate change are going to be the most significant challenges we face over the next 40 years or so-

If the people of the nation truly feel putting the Same ideology that got us into this mess- go right ahead- vote republican- and see what a no solution plan does for a new global arena that needs new ideas desperately - the nation will slide further.

Climate change is something that shortly will become one of the most mentioned items in the NEWS- being equal to terrorism and the economy. The Republican party seeks to solve complex and intricate problems of the 21st century with ideas that are from 1979- not going to work now.

[ReedYoung]

02:36 PM on 07/07/2010

Absolutely! All those subjects converge on our Reaganistic energy policy. Decreasing emissions by improving efficiency is revenue positive, as the state of California has already PROVED and still, regressives claim "we can't afford" ... to have MORE money AND a cleaner environment, AND a more stable environment in which to grow our crops, AND less dependence on aq-infested totalitarian countries like Saudi Arabia?!?

Green policies in California created 1.5 million jobs
October 20, 2008
http://climateprogress.org/2008/10/20/green-policies-in-california-created-15-million-jobs/

Energy efficiency is THE core climate solution, Part 1: The biggest low-carbon resource by far
July 23, 2008
http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/23/energy-efficiency-is-the-core-climate-solution-part-1-the-biggest-low-carbon-resource-by-far/

Oil Dependence Is a Dangerous Habit
January 14, 2010
http://climateprogress.org/2010/01/14/oil-dependence-is-a-dangerous-habit/

ALL Republicans are just such a bunch of worthless, brainless losers !

But this decision by President Obama to demand a national carbon tax finally treats Republican Senators as they deserve to be treated. It forces Harry Reid to bring the CLEAR Act, which is a national carbon tax with a rebate to middle income citizens, to a vote and SHAME Republicans into voting for a policy that benefits everybody but polluting corporate profiteers, ending the policy of appeasement of Senate Republicans.

[niws1]

04:00 AM on 06/30/2010

Did these guys get the memo on why Bush got elected twice? Oh geez, here we go again....I suppose the Aztec's were right.