Talking Points Memo:

Lincoln has drawn fire from environmental and progressive groups for her rejection of the House-passed cap-and-trade bill last year. Her decision to join with Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and call on Congress to make it illegal for the EPA to regulate carbon emissions has been a particular bone of contention, leading to anti-Lincoln advertising in Arkansas from the Sierra Club and MoveOn.

When I asked him about the EPA ban, Halter was direct. “No,” he said when I asked if he would joined with Murkowski’s efforts to weaken the agency as Lincoln did.

But on cap-and-trade overall, he didn’t offer a specific policy stance, instead talking at length about developing alternative energy resources to better the environment and the economy. But he said “there are significant changes that need to be made” to the House cap-and-trade bill before he could support it.

Halter ended our interview before he had a chance to elaborate on what those “significant changes” are.

More on this as it becomes available.

A few months ago I speculated that the Republican party would nominate a climate change denier in 2012. Governor Pawlenty’s statements over the weekend did nothing to change my assessment. Watch this clip from his appearance on Meet the Press:

Here is the transcript:

The climate is obviously changing, David. The more interesting question is how much of it is man-made and how much is as a result of natural causes and patterns. Of course, we have seen data manipulation and controversy, or at least debate within the scientific community. . . . And the way you address it is we should all be in favor of reducing pollution. We need to do it in ways that don’t burden the economy. Cap and trade, I think, would be a disaster in that regard.

As Think Progress documented in November, Pawlenty has gone full circle on the issue, from boosting clean energy and advocating caps on carbon, to opposing all meaningful action and questioning the science. Following the example of Senator McCain, Pawlenty is lurching to the right on the issue in an attempt to curry the favor of an increasingly anti-science Republican base.

Brad Ellsworth is officially in the race for Indiana’s now-open Senate seat. Environmentalists who would consider supporting him should keep in mind his vote against the American Clean Energy and Security Act last June.

Following the vote, here is what he had to say:

In a statement released after the Friday vote, Ellsworth said that while he believes climate change “poses a threat to the planet,” he could not support a bill with the potential to have such a drastic economic impact.

“I am deeply concerned about the unintended consequences this bill may have on consumers and businesses in Indiana,” Ellsworth said. “We don’t know how these policies will ultimately impact utility bills, job prospects and the strength of our economy down the road.”

…

“The bill would place undue burdens on Indiana families and businesses, and particularly in these tough economic times, I could not support it,” Ellsworth said.

He also was worried about the potential effect of the bill on miners’ livelihoods. Most of Indiana’s coal mines are in the southwestern portion of the state.

Ellsworth made his final decision after deliberating with “a broad cross-section of groups and industries,” according to Elizabeth Farrar, his press secretary.

Ellsworth’s official website doesn’t say much about environmental issues, although his page on energy strongly emphasizes biofuels without even mentioning wind or solar.

Meanwhile, the DSCC continues its steady march to irrelevance by touting the fact that various media outlets are describing Ellsworth as ‘conservative’ ‘moderate,’ and ‘centrist.’ As far as I can tell, the DSCC is policy-agnostic, concerned exclusively with electing Democrats. Going further than just not caring whether or not the candidates they um, you know, support the Democratic agenda, they actually seem to prefer that they oppose it. May their influence continue to wane.

On the heels of aggressive action from the League of Conservation Voters, Credo and FOE and Move On, the Sierra Club is now targeting Senator Lincoln with a radio ad:

The Sierra Club has launched a new radio ad campaign calling out Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) for her decision to co-sponsor legislation that would undermine the Clean Air Act’s protections for public health and welfare and bailout big polluters at the expense of job-creating clean energy and cleaner burning natural gas. The 60-second radio spots, which began running yesterday, will run for two weeks in the Little Rock and Fort Smith media markets.

“Not only has Senator Lincoln helped stall comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, now she wants to take us backwards and gut the Clean Air Act too,” said Carl Pope, Sierra Club Executive Director. “Senator Lincoln’s actions could prevent President Obama from protecting the well-documented threats to public health and welfare presented by global warming pollution. The legislation she supports would bail out Big Oil by halting the president’s plans to save 1.8 billion barrels of oil by increasing fuel economy standards and would also prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from cleaning up dirty coal plants and other big polluters like oil refineries. Senator Lincoln’s constituents ought to ask her why she wants to help Big Oil and out-of-state coal companies to the detriment of the clean energy businesses and natural gas industry that are actually creating jobs in her home state.”

Click here to listen to the add, or read the transcript below.

“Record job losses… foreclosures… rising costs… Arkansas is hurting.

“In these tough times, we need strong leaders to stand up to special interests, and help get our economy back on track.

“But NOW, instead of standing up for Arkansas’ future, Senator Blanche Lincoln is co-sponsoring legislation to roll back the Clean Air Act laws that protect us from polluters putting poison into the air we breathe.

“Health experts say that Lincoln’s action will undermine one of our country’s greatest health and environmental laws.

“They’re urging Senators to oppose it.

“And if this wasn’t bad enough, a major national newspaper reports that the legislation Lincoln supports was done at the behest of lobbyists.

“Senator Lincoln, it’s time to choose sides.

“Lobbyists and Washington insiders—or the health and welfare of Arkansas families?

“Call Senator Lincoln at 501-375-2993.

“Tell her Arkansas needs more jobs and clean air. NOT more favors for special interest lobbyists.

“Paid for by Sierra Club of Arkansas”

Maine:

Arkansas:

Missouri:

Indiana:

Media Matters takes a close look at the GOP’s energy plan — and surprise! — it is nearly identical to George W. Bush’s policies. While Republicans are no longer held down electorally by the dead weight of Bush’s name on the ballot, it appears as if they continue to be held down by the dead weight of Bush’s (read: Cheney’s) completely backwards ideas on energy policy. I’m not sure what is more disturbing, the GOP’s inability to adopt sensible energy policies or the fact that a Democratic President is bending over backwards to make the GOP’s energy policies seem sensible. Both bode poorly for the future of United States energy policy.

League of Conservation Voters:

“Instead of embracing a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill that creates jobs, reduces carbon pollution and increases energy independence, Senator Lincoln has decided to cast her lot with Big Oil and other corporate polluters who oppose transitioning to a clean energy economy,” said Gene Karpinski, LCV President. “Most regrettable is the fact that Senator Lincoln is walking away from her previous support for climate legislation – and given the scope, urgency and magnitude of this issue, she has more than earned a spot on LCV’s Dirty Dozen.”

Senator Lincoln recently announced her opposition to comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, despite the fact that it will create new clean energy jobs, reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and curb harmful carbon pollution.  Senator Lincoln recently co-sponsored Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s resolution, largely written by Washington energy lobbyists, designed to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s finding that carbon pollution endangers public health and welfare. Senator Lincoln has taken more than $1 million in campaign cash from Big Oil and other energy interests, with oil and gas companies being among the top five contributors to her campaign this cycle. She has a lifetime LCV score of 49%, the second lowest score for any Democratic Senator up for re-election this cycle.

Here is Lincoln’s response:

U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln today said that threats from outside special interest groups will not deter her from remaining a strong and independent voice for Arkansas.

Lincoln was targeted today by a Washington-based, liberal environmental group because she stood for jobs and economic growth last week as a cosponsor of a resolution of disapproval to block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

Ironically, this comes just two months after the Nature Conservancy of Arkansas awarded her the Dale Bumpers “Forever Arkansas” award for her significant and enduring contributions to the conservation of natural resources in Arkansas.

Lincoln said she is working for a 21st century energy policy that creates new jobs and she will not be influenced by pressures from outside special interests seeking to influence Arkansas voters.

“I have built a practical, common-sense record on energy and environmental issues while working closely with Arkansas environmental advocates,” Lincoln said. “Threats from extremist groups from outside our state tell me I’m doing something right for Arkansas.”

You be the judge.

Lots of other great info in this Clean Energy Works polling memo as well:

CEWpublicreleasememoFIN2 –

Here is LCV’s television ad:

Here is the document that backs it up:

backupenergyjobs –

As soon as the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act last June, Republicans went on the offensive. Within days, they had launched radio and television ads targeting 14 Democrats who had voted for the measure. Other than the blatant falsehoods in the ads, I have no problem with Republicans attacking Democrats for voting for or against a particular piece of legislation.

But in the past few days, they’ve taken things a step further. West Virginia businessman Mac Warner, who is challenging Democratic Rep. Alan Mollohan, made his case to CQ Politics on Tuesday:

“I’m running because I’m frustrated with the way things are going,” Warner told CQ Politics Tuesday. “I see that we’re heading in the wrong direction with so many of the different components of the economy.”Warner opposes a Democratic-written health care bill as well as a “cap and trade” climate change bill that he said would be “devastating” to West Virginia’s coal-dependent economy.

“Cap-and-trade takes a direct aim at the heart of the West Virginia economy,” Warner said.

You wouldn’t realize from listening to Warner’s tough talk, but Mollohan voted against the legislation, explaining his rationale as follows:

“As currently drafted, this legislation is not in the best interests of my constituents, and it’s not in the best interests of West Virginia,” Mollohan said. “For the past several weeks, I have joined the electric utility industry, the coal industry, the United Mine Workers of America, and other coal state Representatives on negotiations to improve the legislation. We have made significant progress on a number of fronts that together would hold down the cost of electricity to residential and industrial consumers, that would help level the playing field for our steel and manufacturing industries that face international competition, and that would enable the electric power industry to continue to burn West Virginia coal. As a result of our efforts, the bill is much improved from the original draft, but it still falls short in several key areas, and I cannot support it.”

If this were a one time occurrence, it may not have been noteworthy. But Warner isn’t alone in this tactic. State Senator Gilbert Baker is running in the Republican primary for the opportunity to challenge Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln. Here is how a local paper characterized the criticisms Baker made of Lincoln at a campaign event on Monday:

He criticized Lincoln for voting for the health-care bill and favoring a climate bill that he said would raise utility bills by $100 a month.

Leaving aside the absurd claim that the bill would raise utility bills by $100 a month, Senator Lincoln has been very clear that she does not in fact support clean energy legislation:

“The legislation recently passed by the House of Representatives has done nothing to ease these Arkansans’ apprehensions. The House’s Waxman-Markey bill picks winners and losers and places a disproportionate share of the economic burden on families and businesses in rural America. It is a deeply flawed bill. I will not support similar legislation in the Senate.

I’m not here to defend Rep. Mollohan or Senator Lincoln. I think their opposition to clean energy legislation is extremely misguided. But Republican challengers in November’s Congressional elections should run against Democrats for their actual positions, not the boogie-man positions they imagine them to have.

Originally published at EnviroKnow.