On May 21, 2009, the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee reported out of committee the American Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), which is also known as the Waxman-Markey bill.
A revised bill summary is now available.
Meanwhile, word from Capitol Hill is that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, wants the bill debated on the floor of the House before the July 4th recess. Stay tuned.
Showing posts with label The American Clean Energy and Security Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The American Clean Energy and Security Act. Show all posts
Friday, June 5, 2009
Saturday, May 23, 2009
American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009: Approved by Energy Committee, Now on to Other House Committees
Before the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009", which was approved in the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee on May 21, goes to the full House for a vote, various provisions will be considered by up to eight other House committees.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said after the bill's passage by the Energy Committee, "The other committees of jurisdiction will soon bring forward their own contributions...I have asked these committees to work together and with the leadership to finalize this clean energy jobs package with the goal of having this package on the House floor as soon as possible."
The other committees are (in alphabetical order):
Another key committee will be Agriculture. Congressman Collin Peterson, a Minnesota Democrat and chair of the committee, has been openly hostile to the legislation so expect him to fight the ag sector's corner as best he can. (For some reason that has not always been entirely clear to me, the agriculture sector has historically tried to wiggle out of environmental legislation; it seems that the ag sector has never considered itself a "polluting" industry.) Recently, he said, "This stuff is going no place in the Senate. They can do whatever they want with this, but I can tell you, there is no way this is going to pass" ("Obama Hails Emissions Vote But Bill Faces Battle," Financial Times, May 23, 2009). (Hummmm. It would seem that if Mr. Peterson wants to remain chair of the committee that he might want to tone down his unhappiness.) At a minimum, it is reasonable to assume that the agricultural lobby will be begging "their" committee to throw a lifeline to farmers and ranchers.
To be sure, there is lots more to come on this historic piece of legislation.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, said after the bill's passage by the Energy Committee, "The other committees of jurisdiction will soon bring forward their own contributions...I have asked these committees to work together and with the leadership to finalize this clean energy jobs package with the goal of having this package on the House floor as soon as possible."
The other committees are (in alphabetical order):
- Agriculture
- Education and Labor
- Financial Services
- Foreign Affairs
- Natural Resources
- Science and Technology
- Transportation and Infrastructure
- Ways and Means
Another key committee will be Agriculture. Congressman Collin Peterson, a Minnesota Democrat and chair of the committee, has been openly hostile to the legislation so expect him to fight the ag sector's corner as best he can. (For some reason that has not always been entirely clear to me, the agriculture sector has historically tried to wiggle out of environmental legislation; it seems that the ag sector has never considered itself a "polluting" industry.) Recently, he said, "This stuff is going no place in the Senate. They can do whatever they want with this, but I can tell you, there is no way this is going to pass" ("Obama Hails Emissions Vote But Bill Faces Battle," Financial Times, May 23, 2009). (Hummmm. It would seem that if Mr. Peterson wants to remain chair of the committee that he might want to tone down his unhappiness.) At a minimum, it is reasonable to assume that the agricultural lobby will be begging "their" committee to throw a lifeline to farmers and ranchers.
To be sure, there is lots more to come on this historic piece of legislation.
Friday, May 22, 2009
"Landmark" Cap-and-Trade Bill Passes in U.S. House Energy and Committee
The U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee yesterday approved landmark legislation that, if enacted by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama, will for the first time in the U.S. establish a cost for emitting carbon and other greenhouse gases
H.R. 2454, "The American Clean Energy and Security Act" as amended, was passed by a vote of 33 to 25. According to the Democratically controlled committee, "This legislation is a comprehensive approach to America's energy policy that charts a new course towards a clean energy economy."
According to a story in today's Wall Street Journal ("House Panel Clears Plan to Cut Greenhouse Gases," May 22, 2009), the approval of the proposal bolsters "prospects that the government will put a price on carbon for the first time [thus] portending a major shift in how the U.S. uses energy." The European Union has had similar legislation in place since January 1, 2005, and thus the U.S. efforts in this regard are several years behind what the EU is already doing.
The bill as amended would cut U.S. GHG emissions about 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and by 80 percent by 2050. It also calls for about 85 percent of the emissions allowances to be given way for free (as opposed to auctioned off) to energy intensive sectors in the economy. President Obama has called for complete auctioning of the allowances, but clearly that is not going to happen and it now appears the president is flexible on this issue. The remaining 15 percent of allowances would be auctioned at a starting price of $10 per metric ton.
Diane Cappiello, national environment reporter for the Associated Press, explained on the NewsHour tonight, more about why such a large percentage of allowances will be distributed for free:
Despite passing in the House Committee, formidable challenges lie ahead for any eventual passage. The challenge lies not so much in the U.S. House where the Democratic majority is likely to pass the bill this summer but in the U.S. Senate. Despite a big Democratic majority in the Senate, bill advocates will need 60 votes in favor of the measure in order to avoid a filibuster. The bill does not lend itself to strictly "party-line" thinking, since Democratic senators from "rust belt" states are likely to want even more concessions before approving the measure.
A good overview of the bill can be found by clicking here, "House Panel Approves Climate Bill," (NPR Morning Edition, May 22, 2009).
However, it is way too early for green advocates to cheer since yesterday also brought news that the Chinese government is calling for far more aggressive greenhouse gas emissions cuts than either the American bill or EU law has called for. The Chinese have proposed that western nations cut their emissions by 40 percent by 2020 with a baseline of 1990. Washington and Brussels are not likely to agree with this proposition.
H.R. 2454, "The American Clean Energy and Security Act" as amended, was passed by a vote of 33 to 25. According to the Democratically controlled committee, "This legislation is a comprehensive approach to America's energy policy that charts a new course towards a clean energy economy."
According to a story in today's Wall Street Journal ("House Panel Clears Plan to Cut Greenhouse Gases," May 22, 2009), the approval of the proposal bolsters "prospects that the government will put a price on carbon for the first time [thus] portending a major shift in how the U.S. uses energy." The European Union has had similar legislation in place since January 1, 2005, and thus the U.S. efforts in this regard are several years behind what the EU is already doing.
The bill as amended would cut U.S. GHG emissions about 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and by 80 percent by 2050. It also calls for about 85 percent of the emissions allowances to be given way for free (as opposed to auctioned off) to energy intensive sectors in the economy. President Obama has called for complete auctioning of the allowances, but clearly that is not going to happen and it now appears the president is flexible on this issue. The remaining 15 percent of allowances would be auctioned at a starting price of $10 per metric ton.
Diane Cappiello, national environment reporter for the Associated Press, explained on the NewsHour tonight, more about why such a large percentage of allowances will be distributed for free:
"This bill would actually give 85 percent of those credits away for free to a variety of industries. And they did that for the sole purpose [of] assuaging some of the concerns of moderate Democrats who say, hey, listen the coal plants in my state are going to have a really hard time getting there if they have to buy these [credits] and also reduce emissions. So that's exactly why it was done."
Despite passing in the House Committee, formidable challenges lie ahead for any eventual passage. The challenge lies not so much in the U.S. House where the Democratic majority is likely to pass the bill this summer but in the U.S. Senate. Despite a big Democratic majority in the Senate, bill advocates will need 60 votes in favor of the measure in order to avoid a filibuster. The bill does not lend itself to strictly "party-line" thinking, since Democratic senators from "rust belt" states are likely to want even more concessions before approving the measure.
A good overview of the bill can be found by clicking here, "House Panel Approves Climate Bill," (NPR Morning Edition, May 22, 2009).
However, it is way too early for green advocates to cheer since yesterday also brought news that the Chinese government is calling for far more aggressive greenhouse gas emissions cuts than either the American bill or EU law has called for. The Chinese have proposed that western nations cut their emissions by 40 percent by 2020 with a baseline of 1990. Washington and Brussels are not likely to agree with this proposition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
