|
Archives
Gas Prices Trump Global Warming
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress retreated from the world’s biggest environmental
concern - global warming - in a fresh demonstration of what happens when nature
and business collide, especially in an election year.
It was no contest.
A bill the Senate was debating would put a price on carbon emissions, targeting “greenhouse
gases” that contribute to the warming that many scientists say could
dramatically change the Earth.
Opponents wanted to talk about higher gasoline prices. And higher taxes.
That kind of talk spooks Washington.
Senate Democratic leaders couldn’t overcome Republican opponents who
managed to block the most serious effort in Congress to date to address the
warming of
the planet. The legislation called for cutting greenhouse gases by 71 percent
from power plants, refineries and factories over the next 40 years.
The opponents first filibustered the bill, requiring supporters to get 60
votes, and at the same time attacked it on a gut issue making daily headlines:
gasoline
prices that have surged past $4 a gallon in many parts of the country.
“
At the beginning of the summer driving season (you) offer a bill that would send
gas prices up another 53 cents a gallon for goodness sake,” Republican
leader Mitch McConnell needled the Democratic majority.
“
This is a massive tax increase on the American people,” proclaimed Sen.
James Inhofe, R-OK, who is among Congress’ dwindling skeptics when it
comes to global warming, having once called it all a hoax.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., one of three chief sponsors of the bill, disputed
both assertions, saying the bill would provide tens of billions of dollars
a year in tax breaks for people facing high energy costs and for other measures
to ease the transition from oil, coal and other fossil fuels, which are the
cause
of impending changing climate.
She argued that people actually may end up paying less to fuel their cars
because a price on carbon emissions would accelerate the push for more fuel
efficient
vehicles and alternative fuels.
While McConnell, Inhofe and other senators from states heavily dependent
on coal and other fossil energy made no secret of wanting to kill the bill,
they
pressed
for a longer debate, believing they had an issue that would resonate with voters
worried about higher energy prices.
Seeing events unfold in the Senate, GOP leaders in the House sensed a useful
issue as well. Republican Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio called on House
Democrats to bring up climate legislation now. “It would be a great time
to have that debate,” declared Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 3
Republican, citing gas prices.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she didn’t think climate legislation
would be taken up this year, and suggested it would fare better next year anyway
with
a new president.
Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and his GOP presidential rival, Sen. John McCain,
both favor mandatory reductions in greenhouse gases. President Bush had promised
to veto the Senate bill if it ever got to his desk.
Boxer dismissed the political weight of the gasoline price arguments waged
by Republicans as a “phony” debate. “They’ve got it exactly
backward,” she told reporters.
But economics clearly drove senators - both Republicans and some Democrats
- away from legislation that would price carbon dioxide and in the process
dramatically
change future energy use.
“
This bill is built on quicksand,” worried Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio,
who said he foresees skyrocketing natural gas prices - an issue particularly
important to his state - as utilities and industries shift away from coal to
gas.
Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota said that the concern about global warming
is real but that he voted against the bill because it wouldn’t move quickly
enough to jump-start development of carbon capture from coal plants and other
research aimed at reducing the economic cost.
Three years ago when the Senate voted on cutting greenhouse gases, it got
38 votes. Two years before that it got 43. Democrats said this time they had
little
illusion of getting the 60 needed to break a GOP filibuster but had hoped for
50 or 51 votes, according to Boxer.
They got 48, including seven republicans.
“
This lays the foundation for a new president to be able to move rapidly to get
things done,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., a leading advocate in the
Senate for aggressive action on global warming. He predicted a bill will pass
next year.
Archives
|