Climate Pollution Cash Shaping Fate Of Waxman-Markey Clean Energy Legislation
Climate Pollution Cash Shaping Fate Of Waxman-Markey Clean Energy Legislation
Last week, President Obama and Vice President Biden urged the Democrats on the House energy committee during a White House meeting to take “quick action” on comprehensive green economy legislation. Negotiations over how much industries will be subsidized to make the transition to clean energy have stalled subcommittee negotiations over the American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act. In a moment of candor, ACES co-sponsor Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), the chair of the subcommittee in question, explained that fellow Democrats acting as representatives for climate polluters were holding up the bill:
If we can reach agreement with the coal sector, with the steel, with the auto sector, with the refining sector on our committee, which is very representative of the Congress as a whole, then we believe that’ll be a template for passage in the Senate, as well. Because the agreements we’ll reach will be the very same agreements that those industry leaders … will be able to represent to senators are the basis for passage of legislation that they can support.
Members of Markey’s energy and environment subcommittee with strong ties to those sectors include Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA: $50,942 from steel), Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN: $113,033 from auto), Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT: $177,946 from coal), and Rep. Gene Green (D-TX: $330,613 from oil). The trade publication E&E News has identified 13 members of the 34-member subcommittee as swing votes. These “maybe” officials have received an average of $678,570 in lifetime contributions from those sectors, as opposed to $149,397 for the nine “yes” votes:
 |
| Average lifetime contributions from the automotive, steel & chemical, oil & gas, and mining & utility sectors to members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and its Energy & Environment Subcommittee (Center for Responsive Politics). Position on Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act estimated by E&E News. Chart by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. |
The average energy committee member opposed or wavering on the green economy legislation has received six times as much lifetime climate polluter cash as the average supporter:
 |
| Carbon-sector contributions to members of the House Committee on Energy & Commerce. Click to enlarge. |
The obstructionist politicians working to weaken the ACES Act are ironically threatening the future of the industries who fill their campaign coffers. The nation needs to set strong standards for energy efficiency, renewable energy, and global warming pollution in order to compete in the 21st century economy. “Limiting greenhouse gas emissions will enhance U.S. competitiveness,” Center for American Progress senior fellow Jake Caldwell writes. “A carbon cap-and-trade program will reduce emissions and send a predictable price signal on carbon, which in turn will spur major investment in energy efficient and low-carbon technologies, foster innovation and upgrades, and create jobs and export led growth in clean energy technology.”
When the incomplete draft of the ACES Act was unveiled at the end of March, co-sponsors Markey and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, indicated that they planned to conduct a markup of the bill in Markey’s subcommittee before going to the full committee. After the meeting with Obama, Waxman announced that he could potentially bypass Markey’s subcommittee “and mark up the legislation before the entire 59-member panel.”
E&E News Projected Vote Breakdown For Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act:
Henry Waxman (D-CA)
Ed Markey (D-MA)
Frank Pallone (D-NJ)
Anna Eshoo (D-CA)
Lois Capps (D-CA)
Jane Harman (D-CA)
Janice Schakowsky (D-IL)
Jay Inslee (D-WA)
Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
Anthony Weiner (D-NY)
Doris Matsui (D-CA)
Donna Christensen (D-VI)
Kathy Castor (D-FL)
John Sarbanes (D-MD)
Christopher Murphy (D-CN)
Jerry McNerney (D-CA)
Bruce Braley (D-IA)
Peter Welch (D-VT)
John Dingell (D-MI)
Rick Boucher (D-VA)
Bart Gordon (D-TN)
Bobby Rush (D-IL)
Bart Stupak (D-MI)
Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Gene Green (D-TX)
Diana DeGette (D-CO)
Mike Doyle (D-PA)
Charles Gonzalez (D-TX)
Mike Ross (D-AR)
Jim Matheson (D-UT)
G.K. Butterfield (D-NC)
Charlie Melancon (D-LA)
John Barrow (D-GA)
Baron Hill (D-IN)
Zach Space (D-OH)
Mary Bono Mack (R-CA)
Betty Sutton (D-OH)
Joe Barton (R-TX)
Fred Upton (R-MI)
Ralph Hall (R-TX)
Cliff Stearns (R-FL)
Nathan Deal (R-GA)
Ed Whitfield (R-KY)
John Shimkus (R-IL)
John Shadegg (R-AZ)
Roy Blunt (R-MO)
Steve Buyer (R-IN)
George Radanovich (R-CA)
Joseph Pitts (R-PA)
Greg Walden (R-OR)
Lee Terry (R-NE)
Michael Rogers (R-MI)
Sue Myrick (R-NC)
John Sullivan (R-OK)
Tim Murphy (R-PA)
Mike Burgess (R-TX)
Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
Phil Gingrey (R-GA)
Steve Scalise (R-LA)
7 Responses to “Climate Pollution Cash Shaping Fate Of Waxman-Markey Clean Energy Legislation”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
The battle takes shape– the Party of No vesus the Party of Maybe.
May 12th, 2009 at 12:00 pmWhat do you think of this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNzBRiAyn8o
Barton is engaging in pure stupidity at the end, but what about the claims that Enron guys were instrumental in devising the cap and trade policies that Al Gore is promoting?
May 12th, 2009 at 12:48 pmNotice all the no’s are Republican. What a surprise.
May 12th, 2009 at 4:12 pmEconomic Stimulus. H.R. 5140, the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, passed 385-35 on January 29, 2008 (Roll Call 25). It would provide about $150 billion in economic stimulus, including $101.1 billion in direct payments of rebate checks (typically $600) to most taxpayers in 2008 and temporary tax breaks for businesses. Creating money out of thin air and then spending the newly created money cannot improve the economy, at least not in the long term. (If it could, why not create even more money for rebates and make every American a millionaire?) The stimulus has no offset and thus increases the federal deficit by the amount of the stimulus because the government must borrow the rebate money. A realistic long-term stimulus can only be achieved by lowering taxes through less government and by reducing regulatory burdens. Marsha Blackburn voted FOR this bill.(Source: The New American – July 21, 2008)
Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
May 12th, 2009 at 7:12 pmShe is no conservative.
See her unconstitutional votes at :
http://bluecollarrepublican.com/blog/?p=614
Mickey
Only by developing alternative energy sources will we have a chance at a reasonably prosperous posterity.
By increasing society’s real capital inflationary tendencies can be countered. Obstructionist policies will aggravate inflation, as well as leaving us poorer.
These people are literally screwing with our future, for narrow ends. You should be frightened.
May 14th, 2009 at 12:23 amThe font of the chart names is too small to read.
May 14th, 2009 at 11:35 amThe lists of Yeah, Maybe and Nay could be reorganized and ranked according to increasing contribution, within each category. Combining that info with color differences on the chart would permit readers to figure out who was who.
It’s astonishing that politicians would be so transparently — brazenly — venal.
Is reelection so important, these guys would sell their own country down the river? Yup, apparently.
http://cyclopsvue.blogspot.com
May 15th, 2009 at 5:15 pm