As the World Watches, Washington Fails Again on Climate and Energy Leadership

In a world where some of our biggest challenges - soaring energy and food prices, climate change - are global in nature, it's a good idea to leave the U.S. borders for a while to gain a different perspective. My wife and I returned last week from a two-week trip to France and Tunisia -- our first visit to Europe in nine years and first ever to Africa. From my vantage point thousands of miles to the east, the first week of June showcased the best and worst of America's leadership.

Barack Obama's historic clinching of the Democratic presidential nomination was hailed around the world as a key potential tipping point in our history. Like New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, we were in an Arab/Muslim country when Obama's delegate count went over the top. Friedman wrote from Cairo, "We've surprised ourselves and surprised the world and, in so doing, reminded everyone that we are still a country of new beginnings." I could sense that everywhere, from our first cab driver in Tunis ("Americans welcome here, but George Bush no!") to the gushing cover stories about Obama in French magazines like L'Express and L'Optimum, to (admittedly left-leaning) British newspapers like The Guardian. It isn't simply Obama's position as the first African-American presidential nominee that the world is embracing, but also the diversity of his life experience (Kenyan heritage, residences from Indonesia to Hawaii to Chicago) that makes him suited to lead in today's globalized, interconnected world.

No challenge is more global than climate change, and the contrast between international 'Obamania' and the U.S. Senate's latest failure on carbon emissions legislation - the same week that Obama clinched his nomination -- couldn't have been more striking. Pulled from the Senate floor after less than four days of debate, the Warner-Lieberman cap-and-trade bill was an all-too-familiar reminder of America's 7½ years of failed leadership on climate action.

It's not the demise of Warner-Lieberman that I lament - it was a flawed bill on many levels. It was the pathetic nature of the debate itself. The New York Times editorialized that Republicans "behaved like babies" and forced a full reading of the 492-page bill. Leading Republican senators presented the same tired, outdated arguments we've heard for at least 20 years, that we have to choose between the environment and the economy. And now there's the convenient debating cudgel of high gas prices. Let's think through the logic of that - we can't 'afford' to take action on global warming because we're paying too much for the hydrocarbons (coal and natural gas costs are way up, as well) that are causing the problem. Seems like bizarre reasoning to me.

(By the way, that U.S. economy of ours, safely protected from those big bad ruinous carbon limits - how's it been performing lately?)

Many in Congress, at least those among the 41 senators with the power to block anything in the all-filibuster-all-the-time scenario of the past two years, clearly want nothing to do with carbon legislation. To make matters worse, the Senate failed yet again last week to extend the critical investment and production tax credits for wind, solar, and other clean energy sources that will expire at year's end. Meanwhile, the climate and economic effects of our fossil-fueled world - deadly heat waves, wildfires, record floods and droughts - are on the front page daily.

Even China (and India to a lesser extent), as reported by The Economist, are getting into action - Chinese provincial leaders now have "save energy, cut emissions" targets as criteria for promotions. And on June 10, scientific academies in five developing countries -- Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa -- joined those in the G-8 nations in calling for much more aggressive action on global carbon reduction.

We in the U.S. can do so much better than our Congress (and our president, with his threatened veto of cap-and-trade legislation) have shown. Whatever happened to global leadership, cutting-edge thinking and problem-solving, technology and financial innovation, and good ol' Yankee ingenuity? I rarely agree with words spoken by GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, but he said he opposed the Warner-Lieberman bill because it would result in "the largest restructuring of the American economy since the New Deal." He might be right. I think we should get started on it as soon as possible.

Comments

[WIpatriot]

"As the World Watches, Washington Fails Again on...." fill in the blank.

[EinChicago]

Here's basic reality. Climate change is a big issue, probably one of the most important issues the world fasces today. But when teh economy dips, it becomes a luxury. End of story. For eveyone here (and tehre are several) practically working themselves into a masturbatory frenzy over the fall of the economy, what they ignore is that all of the causes we hold dear as liberals are the first things to be ejected by the main stream becoause of cost. The mass populace as a whole is only willing to pay a premium for thgings like fair trade foods and sustainable produce when they have the spare cash to pay that premium.

[noneIn2008]

Biggest issue is FOOD. We have been spoiled by abundant food. With the recent global cooling, food will become an increasing issue.

[joebhed]

Sorry but I disagree on at least one point..

I am not politically aligned.
The Dems are just about as bad as the Repugs from where I sit.
Just about.

From this perspective, it is easier to see the legitimacy of certain arguments being made.

From what I have read about the debate, the Repugs want more thought going in to what this CC stuff is going to cost. Knee-jerk liberal reaction : those repugs are up to their old tricks.

Reality, to me:
The repugs are right.

Why do liberals continue to support the cap and trade program when it is know to be the more expensive and slower means of achieving our CC goals.

The CBO study found the carbon tax is the cheaper and faster means to fund the actions necessary on CC. So, why is it that the liberals cannot stand p and say, "we gotta stop that shit!"

Much easier to await a liberal majority and then be smug when we can say that we got the more expensive fix that was available.

The repugs want a debate on this.
If the Dems are right, then why not present some evidence why the Congressional Budget Office is wrong here:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8934/02-12-Carbon.pdf

There has been NO discussion of the benefits and costs of the policy options for funding climate repairs.
None.

Shame !

Carbon Tax Now.

[seawolf77]

Buy oil. They're not making any more of it.

[noneIn2008]

Maybe mother is making more oil. Every year, they discover more oil than we use.