ClimateIntel.com

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Barbara Boxer, ten moderate Democrats who either voted against moving forward with the Climate Security Act this morning or who abstained from the vote presented a position statement critiquing the the Act as revised by Sen. Boxer and expressing concerns about its impacts to the economy.

The letter, signed by Sens. Stabenow (D-MI), Levin (D-MI), Lincoln (D-AR), Pryor (D-AR), Rockefeller IV (D-WV), Webb (D-VA), Bayh (D-IN), McCaskill (D-MO), Brown (D-OH), and Nelson (D-NE), identifies eight requirements for any future climate legislation:

1. Contain Costs and Prevent Harm to the U.S. Economy
2. Invest Aggressively in New Technologies and Deployment of Existing Technologies
3. Treat States Equitably
4. Protect America’s Working Families
5. Protect U.S. Manufacturing Jobs and Strengthen International Competitiveness
6. Fully Recognize Agriculture and Forestry’s Role
7. Clarify Federal/State Authority
8. Provide Accountability for Consumer Dollars

In an effort to halt delays and proceed to debating amendments to the Climate Security Act (S.3036), 48 Senators today voted “yes” and six additional Senators not present - including both Senator Obama and Senator McCain - submitted written statements of support.

While not sufficient to invoke “cloture,” the only procedure by which the Senate can vote to place a time limit on consideration of a bill or other matter and thereby overcome a filibuster, the 54 Senators who supported moving forward exceeded the expectations of supporters of the legislation. Seven Republicans joined the 39 Democrats and 2 Independents voting in favor of cloture. Only 36 Senators, including four Democrats, voted to reject cloture.

Attention on climate change now moves to the House of Representatives. John Dingell, Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, announced yesterday that the subcommittee chaired by Rick Boucher, would begin hearings on climate legislation, including the Climate Security Act that had been the subject of Senate debate.

The fall presidential campaign will serve as a forum for debating climate policy and energy security and for setting parameters for action in the new Congress next year.

Republican Senators today called for a reading of the full text of the Boxer-Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 3036). E&E News PM [subscription req.] reported that the procedure was invoked by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) because “Democratic leaders did not fulfill a pledge to confirm three of President Bush’s judicial appointees before Memorial Day.” The floor debate is now projected to begin tomorrow, with the likely introduction of a number amendments, including ones related to nuclear power.

The reading began at 1 PM and is expected to continue into the night. Listen to the reading on C-SPAN2 online (Windows Media Player or RealMedia).

The Senate’s Democratic leadership had planned to debate the Climate Security Act in earnest this morning, but instead spent the day in the midst of a 30 hour preliminary debate period required by a Republican procedural motion. Both sides offered partisan recriminations, with Democrats blaming Republicans for stalling the bill, while Republicans accused Democrats of trying to limit debate and the number of amendments that can be considered.

During this 30 hour period, which expires overnight tonight, the debate focused on large-scale questions - in particular the absence of nuclear subsidies, the overall costs of the bill, and how revenue is scheduled to be allocated.

(more…)

The Senate has begun debate on S. 3036, the Climate Security Act (the Lieberman-Warner Bill in the vernacular). While there looks to be more than enough votes in the Senate to move to a debate, it is anyone’s guess whether there are the 60 votes needed to cut off debate and move to a final vote- that will largely be determined by the type and amount of amendments that are accepted, rejected, or permitted to be debated. Getting the 60 votes necessary to cut off debate became one vote harder this week with the absence of Sen. Ted Kennedy.

For further initial background on the debate, today’s Washington Post cites the call to action inherent in the recent federal Climate Change Science Program report as contributing to a “sturdy platform” for leadership from the next Administration; while the New York Times analyzes conflicting interests of various industry groups and the Wall Street Journal’s Environmental Capital predicts that “nothing much will happen.”

ClimateIntel will monitor the debate and update this blog as events warrant. C-SPAN2 is streaming the debate online (Windows Media Player or RealMedia).

The Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act has emerged as the leading legislative vehicle for the creation of a national cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Recently described by the Wall Street Journal as “the most extensive government reorganization of the American economy since the 1930s,” the Climate Security Act would, among many other things, require U.S. importers of a wide range of manufactured goods to purchase and surrender emissions allowances representing the GHGs associated with manufacture of the imported goods.

This requirement, intended to ensure that U.S. emissions caps do not diminish the competitiveness of domestic manufacturing industries vis-à-vis their foreign rivals, would only be excused for goods produced in countries that have adopted GHG emissions requirements as stringent as those in effect in the United States. In this way, the Climate Security Act would use U.S. market access to compel foreign exporting nations to limit GHG emissions, and could significantly affect trade flows.

In anticipation of the floor debate scheduled to begin in the Senate next week, Senator Boxer issued a substitute bill (S. 3036) that significantly alters the regulation of imports. One of the principal trade-related changes in the substitute bill is that it would create an International Climate Change Commission (ICCC) that would determine which foreign countries have taken “comparable action” to the United States in curbing GHG emissions. A negative determination would trigger the requirement for importers to provide emissions allowances pursuant to an International Reserve Allowance Program. The ICCC’s duties would also extend to determining the scope of manufactured goods falling under the import provisions, as well as modifying the import emissions allowance requirements as warranted.

(more…)

By a vote of 11-8, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee this evening reported to the full Senate the Lieberman/Warner climate change bill (S. 2191), with Sen. John Warner (R-VA) joining all committee Democrats and Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in voting for the bill.

Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) characterized the bill as a strong first step toward reducing carbon emissions while creating new economic opportunities in energy technology. Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK) and other Republican Committee members expressed concern about the economic impacts of the bill and contended that the Committee should not have acted on the bill until the Environmental Protection Agency and Energy Information Administration had conducted an economic assessment of the legislation.

During the markup, the Committee considered, in lieu of the original text of S. 2191, a substitute amendment that Chairman Boxer proposed. Among the few changes to the original legislation, the Boxer substitute shifts from 2031 to 2036 the timeline for phase-out of the free allocation of emissions credits provided under the bill; increases the percentage of auctioned credits; establishes a new limit on hydrofluourocarbon emissions; and institutes an 80 percent cap on emissions from natural gas distributors. The substitute also directs EPA to report to Congress by 2013 on whether tighter emissions limits are needed for mercury, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide. Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) introduced but withdrew an amendment to require mandatory caps on such emissions, but said he would re-visit the issue when the full Senate considers the bill.

Amendments considered during the mark-up are summarized after the break.

(more…)

Starting today, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will mark up S.2191, America’s Climate Security Act of 2007, sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Sen. John Warner (R-VA).

The bill establishes an economy-wide cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions in the U.S. applicable to all business sectors.

Though many parts of the bill are still not firmly set — more than 180 amendments have been filed for possible consideration during what is expected to be a multi-day markup — there appears to be sufficient support on the Committee to report the bill to the full Senate, which would be the first major action on climate regulation in the 110th Congress.

More to follow as the mark up continues …