In the health care debate, progressives are calling for single payer and made it quite clear, in a united fashion, that a (good) public option is an absolute minimum requirement. They’ve put a public bottom line front and center. And they appear to be making progress on it.
Where is that similar call when it comes to Energy / Energy Efficiency / Global Warming legislation?
At the America Future NOW conference, after hearing strong statements from Representatives about the need to keep demanding what is right (single payer) on health care, that pressure “from the left” made it easier to negotiate a better deal, I asked “What about energy? What about similar calls for strong legislation on climate to help make Waxman-Markey stronger?”
The response, in essence, ‘this is the best we can get …’
Well, a number of Progressive institutions chose to speak out yesterday … and we should strengthen/echo their call.
At America Future, NOW, Representative Jared Polis stated, essentially (from memory, not transcript), “Congressman Waxman is a progressive. He is one of us and an excellent legislator. If this is the best he could do, this is the best that could be done and I will support it.”
The bill is still developing.
Will strident calls like Polis’ increase the chance for a stronger bill or keep the door open for weakening measures?
Should we just be accepting scraps at the legislative table?
Or, is another approach called for? Should we calling for what is necessary, highlighting weaknesses, and fighting to make it stronger?
When it comes to the Waxman-Markey ACES, the “progressive” voice has been muted (if existent) even as the bill has been modified, time and again, in favor of entrenched polluting interests.
Perhaps the figures are somewhat muted in impact after TARP and ARRA, but we’re talking $trillions of implications over the next few decades and, truly not to exaggerate, the viability of having a decent chance for a progressive society in the decades ahead. (In face of catastrophic climate change, it is hard to see how “progressive” issues will receive resources or even be seriously on the table.)
Has the tide turned? Are Progressives about to come to the table …
On May 29, a number of groups sent a combined letter to Speaker Pelosi calling for floor amendments to strengthen the bill. A good letter … a very good letter …
Dear Madame Speaker,
The American Clean Energy and Security Act offers our country the most important opportunity in generations to jumpstart our economy, create millions of new, well-paying jobs and set the stage for America to compete and win in a 21st century economy while reducing global warming pollution. A commitment by our elected leaders to a strong clean energy jobs bill will benefit small businesses and set us on the pathway back to economic prosperity. But in order to reach the full potential of this opportunity, Congress will need to stand strong against the special interests that seek to weaken the bill at every turn.
We have real opportunity here. We have the opportunity to improve our economy, to improve our social equity, to strengthen our social structure if we tackle global warming challenges intelligently. Or, we can reinforce existing inequities, reward polluters again for their pollution, and weaken our odds of successfully turning the tide on Global Warming’s rising seas.
Madame Speaker — which path do you wish US to take?
The Bush Administration had a virtual open-door policy to Big Oil for the last eight years. Meanwhile, the powerful interests of oil and coal have had a stranglehold on our energy policy, keeping our country hooked on old, dirty and expensive energy sources. At the same time, China and India have invested massively in clean energy technology development, recognizing that global economic leadership in the future is dependent on investments in clean energy infrastructure and technology now.
America has a chance to lead in the global race if we pass a bill that truly levels the playing field for new energy industries and limits the entitlement to federal resources and the control of our energy economy of Big Oil and Coal.
We are coming out of a dark ages in terms of Federal government leadership on energy and environmental issues. We must understand how damaging the Bush-Cheney regime was and how entrenched the fossil-fools were throughout it.
Yet, long-established energy industries have received concessions during the House committee negotiation process that have weakened this bill’s ability to deliver on the full promise of clean energy jobs, strong, inclusive and sustaining economy in the 21st century and reducing pollution. Many of the considerations granted the oil, coal, and electricity industries would preserve their market power and profits while transferring the cost of reducing pollution to the taxpayer.
Sadly, those fossil fools have had a leading role in shaping Waxman-Markey toward a less productive and more polluting path that rewards polluters, entrenching their market position for years to come.
We believe that industries should pay to clean up their emissions, not demand loopholes, bailouts, and giveaways from the federal government.
So do I …
The clean energy jobs bill will best serve America if we can strengthen its provisions to maximize job creation, invest in the skills of our workers and the long-term economic prosperity of our country, and significantly reduce the pollution that has been caused by fossil fuel industries for decades.
Yes … YES … YES …
In order to achieve
Pet peeve time … anyone want to explain to me the difference between “in order to achieve” and “to achieve”?
In order to achieve these goals
Well, let us be honest, I like the three suggestions below (even as I have some of my own ideas) but let us not fool ourselves. These amendments would strengthen/improve the bill, not solve all its problems and make it the bill that we need. (Now, please note, I don’t see how we get the full bill that we need at this time, thus this is not a call for perfection or nothing …)
by the time it passes the House, we call on the House of Representatives to further the work of the committees and pass the following amendments:
Can’t get this right in Committees, let’s fix it on the floor. And, in this situation, the Progressive Caucus, if united, could have the determining voice.
Amendment #1: Ensure more clean energy for America
Increase the Renewable Electricity Standard to 30 percent by 2020 combined renewable energy and energy efficiency to deliver more clean energy jobs to the U.S. economy more quickly. Utilities would have to achieve 17 percent mandatory renewables and 10 percent mandatory efficiency by 2020, while maintaining flexibility to do either with 3 percent.
This is a meaningful suggestion, more than a 50% increase in what is currently in the bill, and enough to start us (the US) on the path to retiring fossil fuel from our electricity system.
Amendment #2: Hold Polluters accountable: Restore authority to the EPA to regulate carbon emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act.
Small little thing — do not take away the ability of the EPA to regulate CO2 as a health threat due to acification of the oceans and climate threats.
Amendment #3: Create more Clean Energy Jobs for America and Build Resiliency to Climate Change: Reduce allocations to polluting industries in order to supplement allowance accounts that would bolster green job development and protection of vulnerable communities that are impacted first and worst by climate change. Shave allocations from fossil fuel producers and redistribute to programs that deliver energy efficiency and renewable energy, create green jobs and train workers to fill them, and protect natural resources and vulnerable communities here and around the world.
This is important … sigh … yet extremely hard.
The Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security (ACES) Act currently has, according to my calculations, over $1 trillion in direct and indirect subsidies for polluting energy sources and use with $127 billion for energy efficiency and clean energy. [NOTE: There are extremely important and good other, non-directly fiscal, measures re energy efficiency, especially, in the bill. (See, for example, Craig Severance’s Better Buildings, Soon ….) But, when it comes to cash and given way pollution permit value …]
Shifting this matters but seems extremely hard to achieve.
We expect an effort on the House floor to roll back the already weakened target for reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 2020. Our groups will work to turn back this effort. Our organizations stand ready to work with Chairmen Waxman and Markey, the House leadership, and other Committees to strengthen and improve this bill to fulfill the promise of the historic opportunity before us. The U.S. can emerge from this process with legislation that effectively spurs clean economic development, powers our nation with efficient, renewable, home-grown energy sources, and establishes a carbon reduction plan that can give us the credibility to lead the international community to a global agreement. Given a chance, American innovation and ingenuity can lead us out of this crisis into long-term and broadly shared economic prosperity.
Moving forward with the legislation, will we strengthen it to something that truly helps the US step out firmly to a prosperous, climate friendly future or will fossil-foolish interests further weaken and distort it to keep our feet in a polluting 19th century energy system?
We need the first, we need legislation that marries economic opportunity, social equity, and a clean energy future.
We will work tirelessly to accomplish that goal.
So will I …
Sincerely,
1Sky
Acorn
Democracia Ahora
Environment America
Green for All
Health Care Without Harm
Oxfam
MoveOn
Rock the Vote
Sierra Club
US Action
As part of this, MoveOn sent out a letter to members. The action link: here.