Nobel Prize-winning economists and scientists will deliver a letter to the U.S. Senate today, urging lawmakers to require immediate cuts in global warming emissions. The letter was signed by more than 2,000 prominent U.S. economists and climate scientists, including eight Nobel laureates, 32 National Academy of Sciences members, 11 MacArthur “genius award” winners, and three National Medal of Science recipients.
“The nation’s leading scientists and economists have joined together to tell policymakers we agree about the urgency of addressing climate change now,” said James McCarthy, one of the letter’s organizers and a biological oceanography professor at Harvard University. “The bad news is the science of climate change is indisputable. The good news is we can cost-effectively cut the emissions that are causing it.”
Senate Majority Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has instructed Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) to produce a revamped climate bill as soon as possible, according to sources, a task Kerry intends to accomplish within two weeks.
The marching orders could represent the best chance advocates will get to pass a climate and energy bill before the November elections. Kerry has been working with Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) on drafting a measure that could attract bipartisan support, but it remains unclear what combination of policies would draw enough votes to win passage.
“The majority leader is deadly serious about making progress this year on climate and energy reform,” Kerry said in a statement. “He’s been a hero every step of the process and he’s been in constant communication. Senators Lieberman, Graham and I have been meeting every day and we’re on a short track here, piecing together legislation and working with our colleagues so it can be finished and rolled out soon.”
Axelrod is always coy, but he seems especially reluctant to commit in this brief interview with The Hill. Here is the full transcript:
The Hill: There were quite a few mentions of climate change in the president’s speech.
Axelrod: I don’t know. There was a couple of paragraphs.
The Hill: I think a lot of activists were worried that there would be even less than that. To what extent is the White House prepared to put political capital behind emissions limits in 2010?
Axelrod: We are working with, as the president said, a bipartisan group on the issue and we want to get something done. We are going to be working closely with them to see to it that that happens. But obviously it is going to require support from both sides of the aisle.
The Hill: Are you confident that you can get that support?
Axelrod: I think there is a great deal of support for energy legislation, and the president laid out an aggressive agenda there that includes nuclear, that includes some additional domestic exploration, that also includes alternative energy sources. And I think there is a great deal of support for that, and this ought to be part of that.
The Hill: Do you think you can get that blended with the actual limits on greenhouse gas emissions?
Axelrod: I think that we want a comprehensive energy package, and that is what members on both sides of the aisle are working for.
“I like what he said about nuclear energy,” said Sen. George LeMieux of Florida, one of the few Republican senators who has expressed interest in the climate issue. “I like what he said about drilling, if we do it the right way. … I hope there will be some energy and effort on it. And I’m a person who’s open to working on it.”
“The energy and climate bill that passed the House last summer was one of the biggest pieces of corporate welfare ever to be considered by Congress, with $170 billion in giveaways to polluting industries. Big oil, dirty coal, corporate agribusiness — they all got a piece of the pie. The notion that the bill was onerous on business is laughable. Some of the worst polluters helped write the blueprint the bill was based on.
“Now these greedy corporations are angling for more, and Senator Graham is out to help them. This is special interest politics at its worst, and it is truly appalling. No wonder so many people are turned off by the ways of Washington.
“What’s needed is a bill that is less friendly to corporate polluters, not more. Congress should pass a bill that eliminates offsets and other loopholes, goes further to create clean energy jobs, and is more aggressive about reducing the carbon pollution that threatens our economy.”
“Realistically, the cap-and-trade bills in the House and the Senate are going nowhere,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who is trying to fashion a bipartisan package of climate and energy measures. “They’re not business-friendly enough, and they don’t lead to meaningful energy independence.”
Mr. Graham said the public was demanding that any energy legislation from Washington focus on creating jobs, whether by drilling for offshore oil or building wind turbines.
“What is dead is some massive cap-and-trade system that regulates carbon in a fashion that drives up energy costs,” he said.
Mr. Graham’s opinion matters because he has been the only Republican willing to work with Democratic senators on some form of climate change legislation. He said that the price of attracting Republican and business support was to use the legislation to provide incentives for building nuclear power plants, stepped-up domestic oil and gas exploration and subsidies for reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal.
Senator Lieberman is the last person who should be leading negotiations on an important progressive priority. There is literally nobody I’d rather have compromising on my behalf:
“We are really working hard to get something done this year and we are prepared to compromise,” he said.
And who will he be compromising with?
He noted talks last week with White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, and a separate session with officials from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
