The Politico is reporting that Senate Democrats are urging the Obama Administration to stop pushing cap-and-trade. If they are correct that "at least half a dozen" Democrats are against the massive tax on everything produced or transported using energy, then even the caving in of climate moron Lindsey Graham will not be able to save the Boxer-Kerry monstrosity. Thank goodness.
Democrats know they will already be in a political fight for their lives having fallen on the sword for Obama in the health care debate. They're now saying "enough is enough". Obama may be The One, but it's Mary Landrieu who's going to lose her next election.
It's actually almost amusing to see the list of names put out by Politico as those opposed to cap-and-trade:
Landrieu, Nelson (NE), Bayh, Conrad -- all (with the semi-exception of Conrad) people who were on the fence about the Senate's health care bill and widely expected to pay the ultimate political price for putting their fealty to Reid and Obama over the wishes of their constituents and the (literal) health of the nation.
This is not over, though. While cap-and-trade may be dead, the concept of raising the price of carbon emissions to control man-made global warming - a non-existent hoax designed purely to allow and propel just this sort of government-growing, anti-capitalist, anti-American legislation -- remains alive and well with support from the usual GOP suspects, i.e. both Senators from Maine in addition to Lindsey Graham. (Strangely, John McCain seems to have seen the light.)
We must remain vigilant against any form of carbon tax and we must be particularly critical of Republicans who support any such plan, particularly as they try to make the sales job easier for the left by suggesting taxes where the money "is returned to the people". Right. It's returned to the people in the same way Social Security is? In other words, in a way in which government actually spends all the money while racking up budget-busting debts which are already crushing the financial futures of our children?
One thing that's helping "our side" is that the climate is not cooperating. Whether actual temperatures, sea levels, ice accumulation, the planet is clearly moving away from a natural cyclical peak (even as CO2 concentrations have risen.) It's hard to say the world is going to overheat when it's getting cooler consistently.
Also, two scientific points which need to be made repeatedly when discussing the issue with less well-informed members of the public: First, cven if you buy the idea that CO2 causes a "greenhouse effect", the effect is logarithmic, meaning that each additional CO2 molecule in the atmosphere has less of an effect than the prior CO2 addition. Doubling CO2 concentrations from here will have a much smaller impact than the increase from half of today's concentrations to now. Second, 95% of the total "greenhouse effect" is caused by water vapor, which is essentially 100% naturally occurring. Carbon Dioxide, which represents less than 0.04% of the atmosphere accounts for less than 4% of the greenhouse effect. Furthermore, only about 3% of all CO2 is man-made. In fact, combining all greenhouse gases, humans are only responsible for less than half of one percent of the entire greenhouse gas effect. And for this, the Democrats and a few RINOs want to saddle the economy with hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes?
Yes and No. The RINOs and a few idealistic but uninformed liberals may actually believe in man-made global warming. But mostly this is a battle for money and power. For your money and for the power of the free market and private industry. This is as important a battle as health care reform and I hope that if something ever comes up for a vote, rational people across party lines will bombard their elected representatives with an unmistakable message: A vote for this bill is a vote for your next election opponent.
|<< <||> >>|