Back to Basics

Does this make it more likely that Christie will run for president? In any case, it is a good sign that he would be willing to do this even in a very liberal state such as NJ.

In a blow to clean energy advocates throughout the Northeast, Gov. Chris Christie said this morning that the state will pull out of the region’s “gimmicky” cap-and-trade program by the end of the year.
During a Statehouse news conference, Christie acknowledged the effects humans are having on climate change but said the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative was doing nothing to solve the problem.
“This program is not effective in reducing greenhouse gases and is unlikely to be in the future,” Christie told reporters. “The whole system is not working as it was intended to work. It’s a failure.” . . .

Calling it a “gimmicky program” and a “failure” that taxes citizens and businesses, Gov. Chris Christie announced today that New Jersey will pull out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initative by the end of the year. . . .

Climate change is real. Climate change is manmade. Manmade climate change has happened within the last twenty-four months. Leaders in the climate change debate have controlled the message for forty years since the adoption of the Clean Air Act. They have “approached climate change politics with an air of disdain,” according to Fred Krupp, President, Environmental Defense Fund (established in 1967).

Krupp addressed the changing political climate at Fortune Magazine’s Brainstorm Green Conference in early April and admitted that there is a “newfound hostility to climate policy.” He advised the environmental community to be “more humble” and “less arrogant.” He acknowledged the failure of a comprehensive energy and/or cap and trade policy.

Krupp is correct. With the falsification of climate records exposed—known as Climategate, the American people now see climate change as merely hysteria. Polls show they do not view it as a real problem that we need to address now.

At the same conference, Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy, agreed. He said, “Cap and trade cannot be sold and must be reinvented,” adding that it was going to be hard to “resurrect cap and trade.”

Climate change legislation has been the holy grail of the environmental movement—but the climate has changed. Now the green movement is playing defense.

This change of climate is not from carbon emissions—though it is manmade. At the same conference, former green jobs czar, Van Jones, didn’t “blame the environmentalists or the policy concept itself.” What brought about the change? How’d the debate get reframed and cause the death of cap and trade? Something, Jones pointed out, no one in the room had heard of twenty-four months ago—“a right-wing populace movement” that the carbon emission supporters failed to take seriously: “the tea party.”

Man changed the political climate in just two years. After forty years, environmentalists are now on the defense because of some under-estimated “upstarts.”

This change of climate was evident during the recent legislative battles over the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to use the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon emissions—which environmentalists believe causes climate change.

In late March/early April four bills were introduced in the Senate—each designed to limit the EPA’s authority. Not surprisingly, none passed in the Democrat-held Senate. However, the change of climate can be seen in the numbers. In the vote on April 6, the bills with the least restrictions on the EPA’s authority were trounced (Baucus Amendment 7-yes, 93-no; Rockefeller 12-yes, 88-no; Stabenow 7-yes, 93-no) while the strongest, the McConnell Amendment, came close to passing at 50-yes, 50-no. A similar plan passed the House 255 to 172.

While the climate has changed, the fight is not over. The battle continues. Following the Senate’s EPA skirmish, the New York Times said “Efforts to handcuff the environmental agency are not likely to end here.”

Admitting defeat on climate change legislation, Krupp encouraged the environmental movement to try “other approaches.”

As soon as Krupp’s suggestion surfaced, “other approaches” appeared. The next day (April 6) Senators Tom and Mark Udall (NM and CO, respectively) introduced legislation that retiring Senator Bingaman (NM) has been heralding for several years: The Renewable Energy Standard (RES). Simmering on the sidelines, the RES was ready and awaiting its moment.

Get ready. Here it comes. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid revealed today that he has a draft cap-and-tax monstrosity in the works. The Dems are gearing up for debate this month.

Or rather, “debate.” Remember what Democrat Max Baucus said about his own colleagues — they don’t know “what the heck” they are doing as they ram through “message” bills and amendments instead of actual legislation.

And remember: Just because Reid has a draft bill doesn’t mean we’ll ever get to read it before they try to shove it down our throats.

Via the Washington Post:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Tuesday he had assembled a “rough draft” of an energy bill and would aim to bring the legislation to the Senate floor the week of July 26.

Reid (D-Nev.) said the bill would include provisions aimed at cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico and preventing further offshore drilling disasters, along with alternative energy and conservation incentives. The package is part of a broader effort by Democrats to promote initiatives with job-creation potential, as members of Congress head out on the 2010 campaign trail.

Pay attention:

The Senate bill may target emissions from power plants, Reid said. “We’re looking at a way of making sure that when we talk about pollution, that we’re focused just on the utility section,” he told reporters Tuesday.

When pressed to specify whether the Senate would seek a “cap on utility carbon emissions,” Reid responded, “Those words are not in my vocabulary….we’re going to work on pollution.”

What does he mean by pollution? “It means there’s bad stuff in the air,” Reid responded, declining to provide further details.