America's Climate Security Act of 2007
Encyclopedia
The America's Climate Security Act of 2007 was a global warming
bill that was considered by the United States Senate
to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted in the United States. Also known as the Lieberman-Warner bill, bill number , the legislation was introduced by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT
) and John Warner
(R-VA
) on October 18, 2007. The bill was appoved by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in December 2007, and was debated in the Senate during the week of June 2. The bill would create a national cap-and-trade scheme for greenhouse gas emissions, in which polluters would mostly be allocated right-to-emit credits based on how much greenhouse gas they currently emit. The cap would get tighter over time, until by 2050, emissions would be reduced to 63% below 2005 levels. Several environmental groups express their encouragement at the progress in legislation on the global warming issue while at the same time expressing disappointment that the bill doesn't reduce emissions enough. On June 6, 2008, the bill was killed by Senate Republicans over worries that it would damage the economy.
(Okla.) and Larry Craig
(Idaho) offered 150 amendments to the act. In addition, The Mercury News reported that opponents "failed to amend the bill with a provision that would end the emissions caps unless China - about to become the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases - adopted similar restrictions within 10 years." Inhofe said the bill would cost 2.3 million jobs during the next 10 years. The committee approved the legislation by a 11-8 vote.
vote to override a possible filibuster
passed 74-14. The remainder of the day was devoted to debating the start and length of the debate, for which Republicans wished to allot the maximum 30 hours before amendments could begin to be introduced.
The days before the vote had been marked by parliamentary maneuvers and bitter accusations over divergent estimates of the bill's future costs. On June 4, a group of GOP senators asked that the clerk of the Senate read the entire 491-page bill aloud, an extremely rare request. That took more than 10 hours.
On June 6, 2008, the bill, which had bipartisan support, fell a dozen votes short of the 60-vote threshold it needed to overcome a GOP filibuster and move to final consideration. The 48-36 vote for the climate bill came after bitter debate in which opponents charged that it would damage the U.S. economy and drive up gasoline and other energy prices. Democratic supporters of the measure accused Republicans of spreading misinformation about it.
The legislation collapsed for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the poor timing of debating a bill predicted to increase energy costs while much of the country is focused on $4-a-gallon gas. On top of that, a number of industrial state Democrats like Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio were uncomfortable with the strong emissions caps that would have created a new regime of regulations for coal, auto and other manufacturing industries. Republicans, for the most part, held firm against a bill they said would cost billions in regulations while pushing the cost of gas higher. Seven Republicans, mostly moderates, voted for the procedural motion on the legislation while four Democrats voted against it.
(Tenn.) address two common criticisms of the Climate Security Act: that it fails to include a way to offset increased costs for American citizens, and that it allows for the use of carbon offsets.
stated, "Cap-and-trade is... an extremely complex mechanism that presents irresistible opportunities for cheating and profiteering that would deeply compromise its effectiveness... Congress should be focusing on simple carbon taxes that would assess polluters for the cost of their environmental damage and offset the resulting economic loss
by lowering other taxes... Currently, about a quarter of the credits would be auctioned and the rest given away. Passing out free carbon allowances that are potentially worth billions of dollars makes it almost inevitable that politicians will unfairly divvy up the spoils among their supporters. If credits are allocated based on historical emissions, those who have polluted the most in the past end up being rewarded while green projects get little or nothing. All the credits should instead be auctioned, thus leveling the playing field..."
On January 8, 2008, the Washington Post
editorialized, "The Lieberman-Warner measure, an amalgamation of several other climate-change bills worked on in the Senate last year, deserves a vigorous debate. The implications it would have for the economy and the American people demand it. Such a discussion, combined with the action and debate over the House-Senate energy bill signed by President Bush last month, would demonstrate a level of urgency and engagement in Congress that has not been matched at the White House. The president's thinking on global warming has evolved over time, but he still balks at legally binding limits on carbon dioxide emissions, either through international agreements or the Lieberman-Warner bill. That shouldn't stop Congress from pushing ahead with legislation that would signal that the United States is ready to be an active part of the response to climate change."
In a June 1 article in the Washington Post
, CEO of Duke Energy
, Jim Rogers, stated "This is just a money grab. Only the mafia could create an organization that would skim money off the top the way this legislation would skim money off the top."
Some groups and lawmakers remained skeptical that the bill would do enough to curb emissions. A representative of the Union of Concerned Scientists
said the bill was a "strong foundation" but, expressed a desire for tougher measures:
President Bush issued a statement on June 2 pledging to veto the bill, stating that it is too strong, and "potentially a mere floor" for carbon emissions reductions.
On CNN on June 3, Van Jones
, green jobs advocate, represented the environmental community's stance on the bill, saying "We like it, but we don't love it...it underestimates the inventiveness and innovation of the American people"
forecasts real Gross Domestic Product
to be between 0 and 1% lower in 2030 as compared with the reference scenario.
Global warming
Global warming refers to the rising average temperature of Earth's atmosphere and oceans and its projected continuation. In the last 100 years, Earth's average surface temperature increased by about with about two thirds of the increase occurring over just the last three decades...
bill that was considered by the United States Senate
United States Senate
The United States Senate is the upper house of the bicameral legislature of the United States, and together with the United States House of Representatives comprises the United States Congress. The composition and powers of the Senate are established in Article One of the U.S. Constitution. Each...
to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted in the United States. Also known as the Lieberman-Warner bill, bill number , the legislation was introduced by Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT
Connecticut
Connecticut is a state in the New England region of the northeastern United States. It is bordered by Rhode Island to the east, Massachusetts to the north, and the state of New York to the west and the south .Connecticut is named for the Connecticut River, the major U.S. river that approximately...
) and John Warner
John Warner
John William Warner, KBE is an American Republican politician who served as Secretary of the Navy from 1972 to 1974 and as a five-term United States Senator from Virginia from January 2, 1979, to January 3, 2009...
(R-VA
Virginia
The Commonwealth of Virginia , is a U.S. state on the Atlantic Coast of the Southern United States. Virginia is nicknamed the "Old Dominion" and sometimes the "Mother of Presidents" after the eight U.S. presidents born there...
) on October 18, 2007. The bill was appoved by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in December 2007, and was debated in the Senate during the week of June 2. The bill would create a national cap-and-trade scheme for greenhouse gas emissions, in which polluters would mostly be allocated right-to-emit credits based on how much greenhouse gas they currently emit. The cap would get tighter over time, until by 2050, emissions would be reduced to 63% below 2005 levels. Several environmental groups express their encouragement at the progress in legislation on the global warming issue while at the same time expressing disappointment that the bill doesn't reduce emissions enough. On June 6, 2008, the bill was killed by Senate Republicans over worries that it would damage the economy.
Bill Summary
- Capping greenhouse emissions: The bill would impose emission limits on electric utility, transportation, and manufacturing industries.
- Between 2005 and 2012: The bill caps emissions at 520000000 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent, the estimated levels during 2005.
- Between 2012 and 2020: Further reductions of 2 percent per year should result in a 15% reduction below 2005 levels.
- Between 2020 and 2050: Emissions should be reduced by 70% by 2050.
- Transition assistance: To smooth the way for companies and individuals, the Lieberman-Warner bill includes financial incentives for reducing emissions
- Low- and middle-income families: The legislation calls for $350 billion in assistance for low- and middle-income families though 2030. The money would come from programs such as the Low Income Weatherization Assistance Program.
- Modernization assistance: The legislation provides $50085846865 billion through 2030 for investments in zero- and low-carbon technologies.
Subcommittee Passage
On November 5, 2007, the Subcommittee on Private Sector and Consumer Solutions approved the measure, and recommended it to the full Committee on Environment and Public Works. During the subcommittee hearing, Sen. Bernard Sanders tried unsuccessfully to modify substantial portions of the bill, with only one proposed amendment accepted. He had attempted to "strengthen the auction of pollution allocations, lower the cap on emissions, earmark subsidies for renewable energies, demand accountability from the auto industry, and diminish industry's capacity to stall simply by buying carbon offsets."Approval in Environment and Public Works Committee
Warner joined Democrats and Lieberman in approving the legislation on December 5, 2007, following a day of debate in the Environment and Public Works Committee. According to one report, Republican Sens. Jim InhofeJim Inhofe
James Mountain "Jim" Inhofe is the senior Senator from Oklahoma and a member of the Republican Party. First elected to the Senate in 1994, he is the ranking member of the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and was its chairman from 2003 to 2007. Inhofe served eight...
(Okla.) and Larry Craig
Larry Craig
Larry Edwin Craig is a former Republican politician from the U.S. state of Idaho. He served 18 years in the U.S. Senate , preceded by 10 years in the U.S. House, representing Idaho's first district . His 28 years in the Congress rank as the second-longest in Idaho history, trailing only William...
(Idaho) offered 150 amendments to the act. In addition, The Mercury News reported that opponents "failed to amend the bill with a provision that would end the emissions caps unless China - about to become the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases - adopted similar restrictions within 10 years." Inhofe said the bill would cost 2.3 million jobs during the next 10 years. The committee approved the legislation by a 11-8 vote.
On the Senate Floor
On June 2, the bill's first day on the Senate floor, a clotureCloture
In parliamentary procedure, cloture is a motion or process aimed at bringing debate to a quick end. It is also called closure or, informally, a guillotine. The cloture procedure originated in the French National Assembly, from which the name is taken. Clôture is French for "ending" or "conclusion"...
vote to override a possible filibuster
Filibuster
A filibuster is a type of parliamentary procedure. Specifically, it is the right of an individual to extend debate, allowing a lone member to delay or entirely prevent a vote on a given proposal...
passed 74-14. The remainder of the day was devoted to debating the start and length of the debate, for which Republicans wished to allot the maximum 30 hours before amendments could begin to be introduced.
The days before the vote had been marked by parliamentary maneuvers and bitter accusations over divergent estimates of the bill's future costs. On June 4, a group of GOP senators asked that the clerk of the Senate read the entire 491-page bill aloud, an extremely rare request. That took more than 10 hours.
On June 6, 2008, the bill, which had bipartisan support, fell a dozen votes short of the 60-vote threshold it needed to overcome a GOP filibuster and move to final consideration. The 48-36 vote for the climate bill came after bitter debate in which opponents charged that it would damage the U.S. economy and drive up gasoline and other energy prices. Democratic supporters of the measure accused Republicans of spreading misinformation about it.
The legislation collapsed for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the poor timing of debating a bill predicted to increase energy costs while much of the country is focused on $4-a-gallon gas. On top of that, a number of industrial state Democrats like Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio were uncomfortable with the strong emissions caps that would have created a new regime of regulations for coal, auto and other manufacturing industries. Republicans, for the most part, held firm against a bill they said would cost billions in regulations while pushing the cost of gas higher. Seven Republicans, mostly moderates, voted for the procedural motion on the legislation while four Democrats voted against it.
Amendments
Amendments sponsored by Republican Sen. Bob CorkerBob Corker
Robert Phillips "Bob" Corker, Jr. is the junior United States Senator from Tennessee. Before his election to the Senate in 2006, he served as mayor of Chattanooga, Tennessee from 2001 to 2005. Corker was a businessman prior to holding public office.-Early life and family:Born in Orangeburg, South...
(Tenn.) address two common criticisms of the Climate Security Act: that it fails to include a way to offset increased costs for American citizens, and that it allows for the use of carbon offsets.
Reaction
An October 25, 2007 editorial in the Los Angeles TimesLos Angeles Times
The Los Angeles Times is a daily newspaper published in Los Angeles, California, since 1881. It was the second-largest metropolitan newspaper in circulation in the United States in 2008 and the fourth most widely distributed newspaper in the country....
stated, "Cap-and-trade is... an extremely complex mechanism that presents irresistible opportunities for cheating and profiteering that would deeply compromise its effectiveness... Congress should be focusing on simple carbon taxes that would assess polluters for the cost of their environmental damage and offset the resulting economic loss
Pure economic loss
Economic loss refers to financial loss and damage suffered by a person such as can be seen only on a balance sheet rather than as physical injury to the person or destruction of property...
by lowering other taxes... Currently, about a quarter of the credits would be auctioned and the rest given away. Passing out free carbon allowances that are potentially worth billions of dollars makes it almost inevitable that politicians will unfairly divvy up the spoils among their supporters. If credits are allocated based on historical emissions, those who have polluted the most in the past end up being rewarded while green projects get little or nothing. All the credits should instead be auctioned, thus leveling the playing field..."
On January 8, 2008, the Washington Post
The Washington Post
The Washington Post is Washington, D.C.'s largest newspaper and its oldest still-existing paper, founded in 1877. Located in the capital of the United States, The Post has a particular emphasis on national politics. D.C., Maryland, and Virginia editions are printed for daily circulation...
editorialized, "The Lieberman-Warner measure, an amalgamation of several other climate-change bills worked on in the Senate last year, deserves a vigorous debate. The implications it would have for the economy and the American people demand it. Such a discussion, combined with the action and debate over the House-Senate energy bill signed by President Bush last month, would demonstrate a level of urgency and engagement in Congress that has not been matched at the White House. The president's thinking on global warming has evolved over time, but he still balks at legally binding limits on carbon dioxide emissions, either through international agreements or the Lieberman-Warner bill. That shouldn't stop Congress from pushing ahead with legislation that would signal that the United States is ready to be an active part of the response to climate change."
In a June 1 article in the Washington Post
The Washington Post
The Washington Post is Washington, D.C.'s largest newspaper and its oldest still-existing paper, founded in 1877. Located in the capital of the United States, The Post has a particular emphasis on national politics. D.C., Maryland, and Virginia editions are printed for daily circulation...
, CEO of Duke Energy
Duke Energy
Duke Energy , headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina, is an energy company with assets in the United States, Canada and Latin America.-Overview:...
, Jim Rogers, stated "This is just a money grab. Only the mafia could create an organization that would skim money off the top the way this legislation would skim money off the top."
Some groups and lawmakers remained skeptical that the bill would do enough to curb emissions. A representative of the Union of Concerned Scientists
Union of Concerned Scientists
The Union of Concerned Scientists is a nonprofit science advocacy group based in the United States. The UCS membership includes many private citizens in addition to professional scientists. James J...
said the bill was a "strong foundation" but, expressed a desire for tougher measures:
If we are to have a fighting chance to avoid the worst effects of climate change, the United States has to cut emissions by 80 percent from current levels by the middle of the century.
President Bush issued a statement on June 2 pledging to veto the bill, stating that it is too strong, and "potentially a mere floor" for carbon emissions reductions.
On CNN on June 3, Van Jones
Van Jones
Anthony Kapel "Van" Jones is an American environmental advocate, civil rights activist, and attorney. Jones is a co-founder of three non-profit organizations. In 1996, he founded the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, a California non-governmental organization working for alternatives to violence...
, green jobs advocate, represented the environmental community's stance on the bill, saying "We like it, but we don't love it...it underestimates the inventiveness and innovation of the American people"
Economic Impact
The Energy Information AdministrationEnergy Information Administration
The U.S. Energy Information Administration is the statistical and analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. EIA collects, analyzes, and disseminates independent and impartial energy information to promote sound policymaking, efficient markets, and public understanding of energy and...
forecasts real Gross Domestic Product
Gross domestic product
Gross domestic product refers to the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period. GDP per capita is often considered an indicator of a country's standard of living....
to be between 0 and 1% lower in 2030 as compared with the reference scenario.
External links
- The Senate vote on climate change shows progress for future (The Orlando Sentinel).