legislation

The economic-recovery bill includes green funding and drops nuclear and coal subsidies

The $789 billion economic-recovery bill looks good in terms of green spending, according to preliminary analysis from the Center for American Progress. The House and Senate reached agreement on the bill on Wednesday and are expected to approve it by the end of the week; President Obama hopes to sign it into law by Presidents’ […]

Senate and House reportedly reach deal on stimulus with $70 billion in green spending

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Wednesday afternoon announced that congressional negotiators had finalized a deal on the economic stimulus package. The $789 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act contains an estimated $70 billion in funding for clean energy, energy efficiency, and public transportation, according to reports from the Hill. Well, maybe. There still […]

The players: cap-and-trade agonistes

In the last few posts, I covered some of the groups and institutions that will shape climate/energy policy in the next few years. Analyst and all-around brainiac Holmes Hummel, in a presentation linked to by Adam Browning, has a nice visual representation that sheds additional light on the landscape, from a slightly different angle. It […]

Green(ish) news from around the capitol

• Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) is expected to be named the new chair of the energy subcommittee of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday, according to a press release from her office. • First Lady Michelle Obama stopped by the Department of Interior on Monday to visit with Secretary Ken Salazar and employees, […]

What are the prospects for climate legislation in the House?

I think Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Waxman (D-Calif.) may be making both a strategic and a tactical mistake in pushing to get a climate bill out of committee by Memorial Day. I say this as someone who was delighted that Waxman defeated Dingell for the chairmanship.

Strategically, as an extended must-read analysis in E&E Daily ($ub. req'd, reprinted below) explains:

... in the Energy and Commerce Committee, it is often stated that a legislative victory there foretells success when the bill reaches the entire House. "If you do it in committee, I think you do a huge amount of what you need to do for the floor," said Manik Roy, vice president of federal outreach at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

Obama isn't going to see a climate bill on his desk this year (see here). Even Speaker Pelosi was originally skeptical the House would pass cap-and-trade this year.

Obama certainly isn't going to devote a lot of time and political effort to raising the issue's profile in the next three months -- nor should he.

So why push such an important and difficult vote before the ground has been laid for it, when you will be operating with one hand tied behind your back? At a time when the administration, public, and media are focused squarely on the greatest economic mess since the Great Depression? Even if Waxman succeeds under such circumstances, he may be stuck with a weaker bill than he otherwise could have gotten.

I will explore what I see as Waxman's tactical mistake -- trying to put energy legislation into his climate bill -- in a later post.

Here is the full E&E Daily story:

Obama talks tough on energy in first prime-time press conference

President Obama had some firm words for critics of his economic stimulus plan in his first presidential news conference on Monday night, using some of his most forceful comments to defend the green energy investments in the plan. “Why would that be a waste of federal money?” asked Obama. “We’re creating jobs immediately by weatherizing […]

Green spending cuts still on table in Senate, more…

The Senate is likely to vote Tuesday to move forward with the stimulus package. The fate of the package, now weighing in at $827 billion in new spending and tax cuts, rests on whether or not senators OK a bipartisan compromise amendment from Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). As we reported last week, […]

Bingaman unveils draft of renewable energy standard

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, is passing around a discussion draft [PDF] of a renewable electricity standard (RES) bill that will be taken up by his committee this week. The bill would require 4 percent of U.S. electricity to come from renewable sources by 2011, scaling up to […]

Senate hones in on crucial need for country: more cars

I was chatting the other day with Jack Hidary, chair of SmartTransportation.org, about the "cash for clunkers" bill he's been pushing up on the Hill (watch him debate the bill with all-purpose dumbass Patrick Michaels here).

On balance I'm a big fan of the idea -- offering vouchers toward the purchase of new fuel-efficient cars or transit passes to those who turn in old gas guzzlers -- though there are reasons for caution, well-described by Rob Inglis here. After all, there's a lot of energy and emissions involved in manufacturing new cars. Would removing the oldest of the gas guzzlers still be a net economic and climate gain? It's a subject worth investigating and debating.

You know what isn't worth investigating or debating? You know what policy would absolutely, certainly, no-doubt-about-it suck from both an economic and climate perspective? Just giving people tax money to buy new cars, with no restrictions. You know, just to get more cars made and sold and on the road.

Naturally, the Senate is taking the latter route.

We are ruled by idiots.