Here’s a roundup of responses to Bush’s climate speech. We’ll add to it as more come in.

Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), chair of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming:
“By the time President Bush’s plan finally starts to cut global warming emissions, the planet will already be cooked. The President’s short-term goal is to do nothing, his medium-term goal is to do nothing much, and his long-term goal is to do nothing close to what’s needed to save the planet from global warming.”

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (ID-Conn.):
“I share the President’s preference of a market-based approach over carbon taxes. I remain encouraged by EPA’s finding last month that the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act will achieve strong results in curbing global warming without imposing economic hardship on Americans. I don’t think that the President’s statement will have any negative impact on our efforts to attract votes to the Climate Security Act on the Senate floor this June. I remain confident about the prospects of this critical legislation.”

Sen. John Warner (R-Va.):
“The President’s announcement today that he supports measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. is welcome news as the Senate prepares to consider climate change legislation this summer. This personally delivered message is recognition that a growing problem faces America — and the world — caused by erratic fluctuations in climate, particularly temperature variations and rainfall patterns. I am pleased the President is prepared to engage on this vital issue, both on Capitol Hill and on the international stage.”

National Association of Manufacturers President John Engler:
“President Bush has laid out a constructive and balanced set of principles to curb greenhouse gas emissions by 2025 … We agree with President Bush that Americans deserve an honest and open discussion of climate change solutions by their elected representatives rather than decisions imposed by unelected regulators and judges. However, the primary federal legislation (S. 2191) sponsored by U.S. Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) set for debate in Congress would do more economic harm than environmental good. We look forward to working with Congress and the administration on legislation that reduces greenhouse gas emissions without damaging the economy.”

Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.):
“Today, the president offered a can’t-do plan for a can-do people. He has been silent for so long, we all were thirsty for his climate proposal. Some may take any drop of water as the solution. But the tidbits offered today were a mirage that did nothing to quench our thirst … Americans have the will, talent, and can-do spirit to meet or exceed an aggressive limit on carbon-dioxide emissions. The president needs to back a plan that will challenge us, like President Kennedy did in 1961 when he challenged us to land a man on the moon. His speech today was a drought of vision and leadership. Congress will continue to pick up the mantle.”

Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.):
“The President’s proposal on global warming simply shows a lack of political courage. This is nothing more than an 11th hour scramble on an issue that should have been a priority seven years ago. Instead of wasting precious time, the President should be working with the New Direction Congress to pass historic cap-and-trade climate legislation.”

Competitive Enterprise Institute Director of Energy & Global Warming Policy Myron Ebell:
“President Bush’s global warming proposals could have been worse … But it was still a pointless speech that was unnecessary. While the President said that the global warming debate was intensifying, global warming alarmism is collapsing all around the world. With today’s proposals, however, the President has managed to re-energize that alarmism … President Bush has moved the debate toward energy rationing policies that will raise electricity and gasoline prices paid by consumers … But perhaps we should be grateful that he hasn’t moved the debate far enough to please the global warming alarmists.”

Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope:
“The president is throwing a Hail Mary to polluters in a last-ditch effort to stave off any meaningful action on global warming. Under the president’s plan we’ll need a real miracle to save us from global warming.”

Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder:
“President Bush’s proposal is a transparent attempt to block progress in the fight against global warming … The idea that President Bush is serious about fighting global warming is laughable. Fortunately, Bush’s attempt to impede progress doesn’t really matter. This is the last whimper from an increasingly irrelevant president. Bush will be gone in a matter of months and our country will then finally have an opportunity to show the leadership the world has been calling for.”

Center for American Progress Senior Fellow and Director of Climate Strategy Daniel J. Weiss:
“After squandering seven years, President Bush still refuses to respond to alarm bells. His strategy announced today is like trying to douse a 10-alarm fire with a garden hose — it is completely inadequate.”

League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski:
“Earlier this year, the Vatican announced that polluting is a sin, and we had hoped that Pope Benedict could convince President Bush to take meaningful action to reduce global warming … The President may have confessed that global warming is a problem, but his inadequate proposals show that he’d rather kiss the rings of oil executives than listen to the Holy Father and every reputable climate scientist in the world. This proposal is too little, too late to effectively reverse global warming and too little, too late to save this President’s record of failure.”

Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp:
“The White House sees the handwriting on the wall and knows that regulations are coming one way or another. The administration is now inching closer to the table, and that can help move a bill in 2008. What remains to be seen is whether the President is willing to support legislation that gets the job done … On the details, he falls far short of the mark today.”

Greenpeace USA Executive Director John Passacantando:
“Instead of proposing decisive action and reversing a two-term legacy of obstructing any meaningful progress on global warming, President Bush has once again offered more voluntary and non-binding proposals rather than hard science-based targets to reduce this country’s global warming pollution. He talked about vague principles rather than taking principled action … The time has come to look beyond President Bush and towards the next occupant of the White House for leadership and vision on global warming. President Bush came into the office in 2001 as an oilman from Texas and he leaves office in 2009 an oilman from Texas.”

Natural Resources Defense Council President Frances Beinecke:
“In his eighth year, the president has just proposed a path on global warming weaker than the campaign pledge he made in September of 2000 and broke three months into office. Not content with blocking action over the last eight years, this president is trying to lock in pollution growth for the next 15. His approach would extend his dangerous legacy on global warming far beyond his time in office. His statement seems a thinly disguised attempt to derail global warming solutions currently moving in Congress. The Lieberman-Warner bill is set to be voted on in June and it should be strengthened and passed, not attacked by this do-nothing president.”