"We believe the United States should consider bipartisan and comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation this year with a renewed focus on jobs and reduced dependence on foreign oil," the letter said. Signing the letter were Senators Tom Udall (N.M.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Kay Hagan (N.C.), Ron Wyden (Ore.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Tom Harkin (Iowa), Tom Carper (Del.), Mark Udall (Colo.), Al Franken (Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.), Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Patty Murray (Wash.), Ted Kaufman (Del.), Ronald Burris (Ill.), Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.), Mark Warner (Va.), Maria Cantwell (Wash.), Arlen Specter (Pa.), Jon Tester (Mont.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.).
If the Senate is able to pass climate legislation, it will have to meet in a special Conference Committee with the House to work out differences between their bills. The House passed Climate legislation last year: H.R. 2454- The American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) of 2009. Championed by Rep. Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Markey (D-MA), the House bill establishes a carbon cap and trade program, addresses siting of transmission lines, and includes a national Renewable Energy Standard (RES).
But, the question remains as to what climate bill would be taken up by the Senate, and what can successfully pass? The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee reported legislation late last year, but on a completely partisan vote. Because Democrats have lost their 60 vote margin in the Senate, some degree of bi-partisanship will be essential if any bill is going to get past a filibuster.
Senators Kerry (D-MA), Lieberman (I-CT) and Graham (R-SC) are working to develop bi-partisan climate legislation. Rumors abound about what is or may be in the bill being drafted by the three Senators, and various trial balloons have been floated regarding their closed door discussions. One item sure to be considered was circulated by Senator Graham, a national Clean Energy Standard (or CES) which could be met by new generation from renewable energy, energy efficiency, nuclear power or advanced coal generation. Senator Graham's proposed CES would eventually reach the level of requiring 50% of power generation from qualified sources by 2050. Other provisions reported to be under consideration by the three Senators have recently drawn public criticism from some groups supporting climate legislation. In particular, major environmental groups have raised concerns about possible provisions to pre-empt state laws or EPA regulatory action.
If climate legislation is cannot break through the filibuster blockade, two related courses of action are seen as possible. First, it could take action on legislation to block or delay EPA from taking action on adopting greenhouse gas regulations. Senator Murkowski (R-AK) has introduced legislation to strip EPA of any authority to regulate greenhouse emissions (S.J.Res. 26), and Senator Rockefeller (D-WV) has sponsored legislation to delay any regulation by at least two years (S.3072). Either of these measures could also be offered as an amendment to other pending legislation in the Senate, and environmental groups will have to work diligently to avoid a climate set-back should either reach a vote.
Alternatively, the Senate could focus solely on energy legislation, which might have more bi-partisan support. The Senate Energy Committee reported energy legislation which it would want included in any Senate version of a climate bill. S. 1462- American Clean Energy and Leadership Act (ACELA). Sen. Bingaman (D-NM) establishes a national RES, address transmission siting, and includes other clean energy initiatives. This legislation could be considered by the Senate separate from climate legislation, and some believe it would stand a better chance of passage if it was decoupled from a discussion of cap-and-trade and/or carbon taxes.
Some have proposed moving ahead with legislation on energy coupled with energy tax incentives. Doing so would potentially build upon several bills, including S. 1462, and legislation introduced in the House to extend the current renewable energy tax grant provisions, H.R. 4599, the Renewable Energy Expansion Act of 2010 sponsored by Rep. Blumenauer (D-OR). An energy-energy and tax incentives bill appears to have a lot of appeal among renewable advocates, but could be viewed as a set-back for the Administration's stated priority of enacting comprehensive climate change legislation.
Leaders in both the House and Senate have expressed interest in action on a "green jobs bill." Perhaps, even before it tries to tackle some of the larger issues like climate change. House Ways and Means Committee reportedly may be planning to begin work on such legislation as soon as Congress returns from its Easter/Passover District Work Period.
One concern about any renewable energy tax legislation is whether there will be attempts to add crippling amendments. Recent public criticism raised by Senator Shumer (D-NY) and the Apollo Alliance about renewable power development in the US (see: http://apolloalliance.org/made-in-america/report-us-must-do-more-to-prevent-loss-of-clean-energy-manufacturing-jobs-2/) could lead to amendments that might have far reaching consequences.
In the end, it needs to be stressed that even action on a green jobs bill will require at least a limited degree of bi-partisan support, and that may come down to whether there is fall-out from the recent health care debate. While passage of national health care legislation has clearly emboldened Democrats, it appears to have stiffened the opposition and increased the unity of the Republicans in both the House and Senate. With mid-term elections in sight, what may happen in the remaining months of this Congress could depend more upon what the sentiments of the public are about these issues. And defining public opinion is not always easy.
Both energy security and climate change are highly volatile issues. Will there be a new crisis on the energy or climate fronts in the coming months that will drive the political wheels of Washington and suddenly propel action on these issues? It's definitely not out of the question. And knowing how crises have driven these issues in the past, the possibility of such an event cannot be ignored in the political calculations being made about the upcoming elections and whether to engage in or seek to block legislation.
So, what's next? Most observers are saying, let's see what happens after the Easter "District Work Period" which is scheduled from March 29-April 9. After a brief cooling off period, we may find out if there is any room left for bi-partisanship. That will define whether Congress can act on the big issues, climate change and energy policy, or be limited to addressing tax-extenders and finishing the dozen annual appropriations bills needed to keep the government running -- and calling itself lucky if it can even finish those before Congress adjourns in the Fall.
To track the status of legislation by sponsor of bill number, go to: http://www.thomas.gov/.
