Is Cap-And-Trade Dead This Year?
Following conventional wisdom, especially in Washington, is often a fool's errand. Groupthink can be wildly wrong, even if "everyone knows..." or "everyone believes..." something to be true. But every now and then, the conventional wisdom turns out to be right. Which may be the case for the punditocracy's predicted doom for cap-and-trade legislation intended to reform America's energy policy. If this proves to be the case, it will be the first major Obama priority to fail in Congress.
This scenario may have a silver lining -- if cap-and-trade is jettisoned, health care reform may actually pass this year. This may seem like apples and oranges, but that is often true with congressional priorities. But, for the first time, Congress is apparently throwing up its hands and admitting that they just can't keep up with President Obama's fast-paced agenda.
The view that cap-and-trade is dead (at least this year) is becoming widely held. Pundits on the right are predicting its demise with barely-restrained glee, and pundits on the left are predicting its demise with open dismay; but it's getting harder and harder to find anyone in Washington of any political stripe who isn't in agreement on the basic story -- no cap-and-trade law will be passed this year.
At this point, I have to agree. Cap-and-trade could rise zombie-like from the grave and surprise us all, but it's not exactly a safe bet right now. Because Congress has already sent two very strong signals that it does not intend to move forward on the issue this year. The first of these signals was that the revenues which cap-and-trade would have created for the federal government were pointedly left out of the budget blueprint. Now, this blueprint has not been finalized yet, even though slightly different versions have passed both the House and the Senate. But after Congress gets back from yet another of its many vacations, a committee will meet to hammer out one bill that both houses can pass. So there's still a chance, but a very small one, that cap-and-trade revenues could be put back in.
But the second signal Congress sent was the real death knell for cap-and-trade this year. Because "moderate" Senate Democrats worked very hard to make it impossible for cap-and-trade to pass -- and for Republicans to take the blame for it. If you think this sounds like craven politics-as-usual rather than "change we can believe in," well, you'd be correct. Because (while the budget blueprint bill isn't finalized yet) the agreement seems to now be that health care legislation will be eligible for "fast-track" rules (which only require a majority vote in the Senate), but cap-and-trade will not be fast-tracked, and will require the usual 60 (since Republicans will be sure to force such a vote). Which will be an impossible standard to meet for the bill.
In other words, Democrats are all but admitting that they're killing off cap-and-trade for this year's legislative season. And that, when the time comes, they will be blaming the Republicans, even though their own cowardice is the real culprit.
Now, I am not arguing the merits of cap-and-trade here. There are actually quite a few different flavors of cap-and-trade; different schemes as to how to best implement the idea. I'm not arguing for or against any of these plans, or even for or against the basic idea itself. I am merely observing the political realities and headwinds. Which appear stacked against cap-and-trade legislation.
President Obama has four core agenda items, as he will tell anyone who asks. The first is not really of his making -- fixing Wall Street and the economy. The other three are the priorities he ran on -- education, health care, and an energy policy which can carry us into a future where we are not dependent on foreign oil. Right now, of course, his first priority is dealing with the economic crisis. His second priority -- which he has ingeniously tied to the first -- is health care. He has done a masterful job of framing by stating over and over that "fixing health care is an integral part of fixing the economy." The American people are already behind the idea of fixing health care, but portraying it as essential to fixing the economy further undercuts the naysayers, before they even open their mouths. But Obama's third and fourth goals are energy and education. While nobody is talking much about education right now, it may become a bigger issue later in the year. But it is looking like energy policy is going to have to wait until next year... or the year after (since next year will be midterm election season).
Now, I admit that this could all change, and change quickly. Gas prices could spike again, and the public could start screaming for "something to be done." But that "something" may not be a cap-and-trade system. Republicans have already decided on their framing for cap-and-trade, and it is going to be an effective argument even if gas prices do spike. They're calling it a "lightswitch tax." And when energy prices are high, portraying cap-and-trade as a tax (raising the price even higher) may not be supportable politically.
The likely upshot, even if public pressure isn't at a high (due to gas prices, or whatever other reason), is that either nothing will get done this year in Congress (other than a lot of hot air being expended -- a seemingly endless energy source on Capitol Hill), or that a watered-down "energy policy" will emerge that will essentially continue the status quo. Perhaps enough good things will be included in a bill which limps through Congress that Obama can claim at least a partial victory on the issue politically, but at this juncture the conventional Washington wisdom may be correct -- cap-and-trade is dead, for this year. But if Obama does manage to get real health care reform passed, he will still have had a pretty good year by doing so.
Of course, that's not really good enough. America needs a new energy policy. We need to wean ourselves off of foreign oil. We need to move into a future that is different than the status quo. But it is looking like we will also need to wait another year or so before this happens.
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
-- Chris Weigant
I don't really mind that energy is taking a back seat to healthcare this year. I am hoping this means that Congress will spend more time on getting healthcare right and also have more time to look at the options for clean energy. I have heard that buying green certificates may not really be helping to invest in wind/solar technoligies at all. That in fact the cost of these certs pays the admin salaries and fees only. Another scam perhaps? I hope that you will have time to research this now that energy is on the back-boiler and let us know what the scuttlebut is...
...Stan
I'm with Stan!
I'd like to know a lot more about cap and trade...from what I have heard up to now, it may be a waste of time and effort, anyway.
There is no grass growing under China's feet on new energy technologies and I don't think they have a cap and trade program, do they!!??
You gots to pick your battles... Really, if Obama can pull off health care then he's going to be the most popular president in a generation (and quite likely destroy the GOP in 2010 and 2012), so I would suspect that he has made the decision to let Congress deal with cap-and-trade later while pushing for health care reform now.
But if Congress can't keep up with him, imagine how the poor Europeans feel. He's blown through there like a hurricane this last six days!
Cap And Trade, like Human Caused Global Warming(Yet The Planet Is Cooling) that spawned it, is a joke. It's based on nothing but craptastic "science" and ridiculous fear-mongering.
Nothing, I say again.. NOTHING.. proves the hypocrisy of the hysterical Left better than the fear-mongering of Human Caused Global Warming(Yet The Planet Is Cooling)...
Wooops.. Dunno how that got posted too soon....
I've said it before and I'll say it again..
If ANY kind of CAP/TRADE BS passes under Obama's first term, I guarantee that it will become Obama's ONLY term...
Michale......
After catching up on CW (My Net access has been sporadic of late), I was surprised to see that there wasn't any STEVENS retractions or slams against Obama for "sneaking" into Iraq..
When one considers how badly former Senator Stevens was savaged and ravaged by Democrats, I would have thought that there might be some apologies from those same Democrats...
Further, considering how badly George Bush was attacked for being a "coward" and "sneaking" into Iraq, isn't it blatant hypocrisy for Democrats to say nothing when Obama does the same??
Just a couple notes, pointing out the hypocrisy of the Left, as I am wont to do... :D
Michale.....
Chris,
I just noticed something interesting in my Huffpo notification of your latest posting. It says if I like this author (obviously, I do) then I might like these other writers..and they suggested Steven Weber and Bill Maher. Now it so happens I thought Weber's most recent was hysterical, but was only going to link it for MargaretandHelen's website, but since Huffpo made the comparison I'll post it here...maybe someone will actually check it out; I've never had any feedback from my previous suggestions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-weber/lonesome-rhodes-wild-ride_b_183155.html
Anyhow, it seems Huffpo considers you to be in the humorist category, and going back to Mark Twain that ain't too bad.
P.S.- came across an hilarious comment about Michelle Bachmann's latest ranting on Wonkette...she's one chromosone shy of a potato.
Almost choked on my coffee.
The complete and utter idiocy of the Human Caused Global Warming(Yet The Planet Is Cooling) morons..
http://taxdollars.freedomblogging.com/2009/03/23/state-considers-ban-on-big-screen-tvs/12993/
I have said before that there is one event that can happen after which I would die happy.
I am adding another event to that short short list.
The total and complete exposure of the Human Caused Global Warming(Yet The Planet Is Cooling) religion for the complete and utter fraud and con that it is...
That day is coming sooner rather than later.
Michale.....
Michale -
Stevens was freed, but not (in my mind) vindicated. He may not be going to jail, but that doesn't mean he wasn't guilty, in other words. The prosecutor seems to have royally screwed up, though, and I do have to hand it to the new AG for realizing this and pulling the plug. That's a hard thing for someone in his position to do, so I'll give credit for doing so. In any case, Stevens will not be in the Senate, and that may have to be enough.
As for Obama, yeah, he snuck into the war zone, but I consider that prudent safety measures. I don't believe I ever hit Bush for doing the same thing. The fake turkey, maybe, but not the fact that he had to sneak into Iraq. I could be wrong about that, but I don't remember doing so.
I did slam Sarah Palin for her comments about "visiting Iraq" when she apparently stepped a few feet across the border at a border post from Kuwait. That's not exactly "visiting Iraq" in my book, and she got what she deserved for saying so on the campaign trail. But that's a different issue.
I try not to criticize the Secret Service when they are doing what they're supposed to do -- protect the president. When they start stomping on free speech rights, then they are fair game, but not for doing the job they do (when they do it right). Again, a different issue, but just wanted to say that.
kevinem2 -
I think HuffPost assigns those connections manually, so it may be dependent upon the actual article's content itself. Hey, I'm proud to be associated with Bill Maher!
-CW
@CW
Point taken regarding Obama/Bush "sneaking" into Iraq. I wasn't referring to you personally when I made that comment. As everyone here knows, you are an exception to a LOT of rules that apply to the hysterical Left.. :D But I do agree with on this. The protection of the President is paramount. Where I and the hysterical Left (present company excepted as we have already established, most here are not part of the hysterical Left) disagree is that the sentiment applies equally to Bush as it does to Obama.
Regarding Stevens, let's apply the Steven's situation to, oh let's say, Gitmo, terrorists and torture..
The general consensus amongst the Left with regards to Stevens is, "It doesn't matter that his civil rights and liberties were violated, he's still guilty...
With regards to terrorists in Gitmo, the general consensus from the Left is the polar opposite from that. "It doesn't matter if the terrorists are guilty or not, they should be "innocent" (IE released) because their civil rights and liberties (which they do not possess in the first place) are violated."
The irony of those two opposing view points is as glaring as it is staggering...
As unpopular and politically incorrect as the sentiment may be, sometimes (very often) the end DOES justify the means.
Michale.....