Democrats Slow Down Obama’s Global Warming Plan
Part of President Obama’s budget contains cap and trade policies to curb man-made global warming. This is being met with skepticism by eight Democrats who do not want to include this in the budget bill. The would prefer an actual debate on an issue this important and do not like the idea of pushing it through in the budget. Republicans combined with these eight Democrats may be able to filibuster this deliberate attack on liberty in this country.
Enactment of a cap-and-trade regime is likely to influence nearly every feature of the U.S. economy,” wrote the Democratic senators, mostly moderates. They were joined by 25 Republicans. “Legislation so far-reaching should be fully vetted and given appropriate time for debate
We just need to hope the Republicans remain true and join with the Democrats to block this from becoming law. The eight Democrats who want to have a debate on the issue are: Robert Byrd, W.Va.; Blanche Lincoln, Ark.; Mary Landrieu, La.; Carl Levin, Mich.; Evan Bayh, Ind.; Ben Nelson, Neb.; Bob Casey Jr., Pa.; and Mark Pryor, Ark.
We also need to hope that these Democrats do not succumb to pressure from party leaders. I have made my position on this issue well known and I am glad to see that there are a number of people on both sides of the aisle that want to slow down this proposal and have an extended debate on it. President Obama has a habit of trying to fast track all of his legislation and there is a reason for that. He wants to pass as much as he can before people realize what he is doing. He is trying to do the same with his budget and his cap and trade proposal.
The policies of cap and trade and other global warming initiatives are costly. During tough economic times the last thing that the American people need to be hit with are higher taxes and more regulations on anything, especially a scam like this. This is not the time or the issue to fast track. Regardless of what Al Gore claims the debate is not over. We haven’t even had a debate and if President Obama had his way we wouldn’t. Luckily for us it appears as if there are enough Democrats in the senate who do want to have a debate and this initiative will not get passed before there is at least some debate on it. Unless the leaders get to the eight Democrats.
America's Watchtower 
Combating climate change may not be a question of who will carry the burden but could instead be a rush for the benefits, according to new economic modeling presented at “Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges & Decisions” hosted by the University of Copenhagen.
Contrary to current cost models for lowering greenhouse gas emissions and fighting climate change, a group of researchers from the University of Cambridge conclude that even very stringent reductions of can create a macroeconomic benefit, if governments go about it the right way.
“Where many current calculations get it wrong is in the assumption that more stringent measures will necessarily raise the overall cost, especially when there is substantial unemployment and underuse of capacity as there is today”, explains Terry Barker, Director of Cambridge Centre for Climate Change Mitigation Research (4CMR), Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge and a member of the Scientific Steering Committee of the Congress.
LikeLike
Here is what I just e-mailed Senator Shaheen. She had BETTER listen!:
I am writing to ask you to PLEASE join your colleagues Robert Byrd, W.Va.; Blanche Lincoln, Ark.; Mary Landrieu, La.; Carl Levin, Mich.; Evan Bayh, Ind.; Ben Nelson, Neb.; Bob Casey Jr., Pa.; and Mark Pryor, Ark.; and many Republicans and insist that this crap NOT slide in under the radar. To include this within the budget process without any further discussion is absolutely reprehensible! Do you know what this would do to our electric rates here in New Hampshire? A lot of our energy is produced from burning coal. Doesn’t the Northeast have high enough energy costs already? I will be watching to see how you vote, as will thousands of other Granite Staters. Thank you in advance for going AGAINST what Obama wants to thrust down our throats.
Feel free to use part or all of this and get as many people as possible on board. Maybe we can find a ninth Senator. Hell, maybe we can defeat this whole cap and trade pile of crap.
LikeLike
The problem with the cap-and-trade plans on the table is they’re not really cap-and-trade. They’re more like a tax: the government sets limits, collects money from those who can’t meet the limits, and then distributes the money to selected “good guys.” I’m associated with Recycled Energy Development, a company that’s advocating for a more market-based cap-and-trade plan that allows any company under the limit to sell allowances to any company above the limit. The reason is (a) prices will actually fall as efficiency rises, and (b) instead of pre-selecting winners and thus discouraging innovation, we should reward anyone who can make energy cleanly. More pro-environment, more pro-economy.
LikeLike
That is all that cap and trade is, an excuse to tax. That is what this whole issue is about, raising revenue.
LikeLike