Senate prepares cap-and-trade obituary

November 17, 2009

Carbon cap-and-trade legislation appears to be Dead Policy Walking in Washington.

The devaluation of the Copenhagen climate summit reflects the emerging political reality in the United States. Yes, a bill did pass the House of Representatives in June. And the Senate Environment and Public Works committee passed a version earlier this month. So President Barack Obama won’t go to the talks in Denmark with empty pockets next month.

But it is hard to get a major bill passed in a Democrat-controlled Senate when the Democratic majority leader of the Senate wants the bill to go away. And have no doubt that Senator Harry Reid would like to see cap-and-trade go away — or at least disappear until after 2010.

This explains why as many as five different Senate committees will consider the bill, the same recipe for legislative inaction that bogged down healthcare reform. It’s politics. The 2010 midterm elections are shaping up to be tough contests for many Democrats thanks to the anti-incumbent mood of a recession-weary electorate. And most signs point to a sustained level of high unemployment.

A new Gallup poll finds that 51 percent of Americans see the weak economy or high unemployment as their biggest concerns. Barely 3 percent mention the environment. And Democrats have been unable to sell cap-and-trade as a job creator. At worst, the public sees it as a jobs killer or a costly energy tax.

That charge has particular weight in Reid’s home state, Nevada, a high energy-use state. (All those air conditioners!) So Reid doesn’t want to have to vote for it, which he would be compelled to do as majority leader. And neither do moderates like Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor, Debbie Stabenow and Jim Webb. They noticed the heat that centrist House members who voted for cap-and-trade took from constituents during Congress’ summer break.

Webb of Virginia may point to one path forward with a new bill he is co-sponsoring with Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican. It would spend $20 billion on five mini-Manhattan Projects to study various clean energy technologies, including nuclear.

It’s a plan that seems more likely to create jobs, grow the economy and help the environment — at least more so than one completely out of sync with the electorate. And it is one also more likely to make it into law.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

Yes, it does appear that way doesn’t it, but I would caution people of becoming complacent. This is defining legislation for the Obama administration. Do not think they will just let it die. We must maintain vigilance against this bill that will severly impact the American people and do nothing to help the environment. Write your Senators and let them know that cap and trade is still on America’s radar at

Posted by CC26 | Report as abusive

As a conservative, I would support major research into viable technologies that are non-foodstuffs. Since TMI we have stopped “second sun” projects.

There is no reason that as a industrialized nation we can not have affordable energy. The idea that we have to make it unaffordable and scale back our lives will not fly with the american people.

Posted by John in Du Bois | Report as abusive