The Final Legislative Frontier of 2010: Energy

by: Chris Bowers

Mon Jun 14, 2010 at 19:01


Even though it is only June, we are rapidly approaching the end of the 2010 legislative session.  Congress is scheduled to go on recess during the month of August, and the midterm election season will be in full swing by the time they return in September.  As such, don't expect anything significant to pass after the end of July, leaving only 6-7 weeks for all remaining major legislation.

Current major fights include the struggle over a "second stimulus" in two major emergency spending bills (see Open Left coverage our, stimulus tag), the ongoing Wall Street reform conference committee (see Open Left coverage see our Wall Street reform and financial reform tags), the Elena Kagan nomination hearings (scheduled to begin June 28th), and the fight in the Senate over Don't Ask, Don't Tell (see our Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal tag).

Other than all that, energy will be the final major legislative item that Democrats will address while they still have large majorities in both branches of Congress.  And, when I write "energy," and I don't mean "energy and climate"--I just mean "energy."  Dave Roberts sketches out the state of play:

Last week I wrote about the top five things to watch as d-day for legislation approaches. Now three of them have happened. The Murkowski resolution was voted down, but by a small enough margin that it didn't determine things one way or the other. Reid met with the Senate committee chairs, but there were intractable disagreements and no decisions were made. Lugar introduced his bill, and Lindsey Graham jumped behind it, giving the "energy-only" forces a big push. Obama's still making the right noises about "comprehensive" legislation, but behind the scenes he and Rahm are putting together a back-up energy-only package. And public anger over the spill doesn't seem to be directing itself toward climate pollution.

Long story short, things are looking extremely grim for a cap on carbon.

Josh Nelson echoes Roberts, flagging a notable quote from the man Democrats put in charge of negotiating a climate / energy bill, Joe Lieberman (yes, that's right, Lieberman):

"I don't think the Senate has an appetite for another such epic, polarized legislative war this session," said Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), who met with Sens. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) on Wednesday to strategize on how to enlist support for a compromise climate bill they are writing.

Even six months ago, that didn't sound like someone who is going to make a bold play for a climate bill on top of an energy bill.

Also of note, while Organizing for America has put out a call to action on the energy / climate bill in advance of President Obama's prime time address on the BP oil spill tomorrow, the call to action doesn't specify putting a price on carbon.

So, the last major action of the huge Democratic majorities will be an energy bill, not an energy and climate bill. Good public policy could still come out of such a bill, and there is a wide range in quality of the current ideas being floated around. The range stretches from, on the low end, Jeff Bingaman's ACELA bill and Richard Lugar's new bill to, on the higher end, Jeff Merkley's just-unveiled bill on reducing oil dependency to, as always, a solid proposal from Bernie Sanders.

Unfortunately, as per usual in the Senate, the weaker bills seem to have more currency right now.  Still, it is a fight worth engaging, both because there are good ideas out there that deserve a chance, and because this will be the last big fight in a while with such large Democratic majorities.

Chris Bowers :: The Final Legislative Frontier of 2010: Energy

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Large democratic majorities (0.00 / 0)
with Lincoln, Bayh, Rockefeller, Ben Nelson, Landrieu

do not look huge to me on the energy front

especially with 60 votes needed to pass anything

and Repubs a solid no block


Don't forget that our most progressive Senators... (0.00 / 0)
...are also a no, like Levin, Brown, and Rockefeller...

Disappointing indeed.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!


[ Parent ]
Stand & Fight (4.00 / 2)
If this horrible man-made ecological disaster is still in the forefront in November then it will be an awful election night for Dems but I really think the public would respond well to a new (apologies to Harry Truman) give 'em hell fighting, pissed-off Obama.  Keep 'em in session till Halloween.  The biggest name on the ballot in 2010 is probably the Senate Majority Leader.  Harry Reid's best chance, too, is to be a fighter in Washington, he won't lose because of one less appearence in Elko.

Obama is smart enough to know that the time for bipartisanship has passed at least for 2010.  Stand & fight -- even on immigration -- and especially on energy.  The BP disaster is an opportunity for the President to show if he can transcend the disaster and the very different time when he was elected.  It's such a different, post-crash world now than in 2008 when the country was still in shock.  Obama has to be the change or be a victim of change.  Regardless of 2010 he can still come back before 2012 but it would be easier if it begins now.  


Not going to happen (4.00 / 1)
Obama grew up in Hawaii.  Not in the have to be pissed of to stay warm northeast.

And it really makes no sense to pander to the culture of the northeast.  Same goes for Reid of course.  


http://transgendermom.blogspot....


[ Parent ]
really? (4.00 / 1)
Obama is smart enough to know that the time for bipartisanship has passed at least for 2010.

What is your evidence?

I do not think this is a matter of intelligence.  Obama has some sort weird obsession with that bi-partisan mantra.  Not sure why.

Anyway, I don't see any "inner populist" to be unleashed.  So I doubt we will see any unleashing.


[ Parent ]
re: obama (0.00 / 0)
Obama has some sort weird obsession with that bi-partisan mantra.  Not sure why.

it makes selling out easier to justify: I had to give BP millions in tax breaks in order to get republicants votes. I don't want to give them tax breaks but I need the votes.


[ Parent ]
I'm excited (0.00 / 0)
Tired yup and already to slow?

On twitter: @BobBrigham

ahhh *frustration* (4.00 / 1)
It pains me to see you guys eating the candy right out of Big "Green's" hand.

Google some climate justice organizations and find out who the NRDC, Environmental Defense and all the other establishment green groups really stand to benefit.

What if I told you that one of the largest investors in Massey Energy (remember dead miners?) also sits on the board of Environmental Defense? (This is NOT an aberration to be sure)

The lack of literacy on greenwashing permeating this site blows my mind.

Most important blog in the world.
http://climateactioncafe.wordp...

Indispensable Resources
http://www.risingtidenorthamer...
http://www.globaljusticeecolog...
http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/

Its time to drop wimpy social democratic politics and start confronting climate change at its source: Capitalism

Sorry to semi troll, I just hate to see such intelligent people sucked into the green capitalism (without the rough edges) myth. Now is not the time for electoral politics.

Agitate.Liberate.Create.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox