Tweet
Ezra has a good short piece on why President Obama opted for health care reform over a climate bill, saying that the moment basically was foisted upon him. The health care coalition was broader than the climate coalition, had more institutional actors, and the Democrats in Congress were more united on the issue. Indeed, we’re seeing that to this day, as the Majority Leader in the Senate still expects a “piecemeal” approach:
“I think we are looking to a time when we can get part of this done. We can’t get everything done at once,” Reid said.
Reid acknowledged it’s a “cinch” that climate legislation won’t move this year. But he praised negotiations among some senators in recent months on plans to cap carbon from utilities.
“We have got to be able to suck it up and say I may not get all I want,” Reid said, speaking at a “clean energy” conference he co-hosted at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas. “We are not going to be able, as much as people want, to have a price on all carbon.”
“But why don’t we step back. We had a really good thing going,” Reid added. “The utilities are really interested in doing this because they want the certainty.”
Reid actually said that the House “needs to get real” about the limits of Senate action. One could also say that the Senate “needs to get real” about their ability to change those limits.
Reid seems to be making a nod toward a utility-only cap on carbon, which Democrats flirted with briefly this summer. But even with this narrow approach, Reid appears to be too optimistic. The carbon cap’s a dead letter, and the renewable energy standard doesn’t appear in the current bill on the table in the Senate. Meanwhile all kinds of capital investment is sitting on the sidelines while they wait to see if an RES will force a ramp-up on renewables. But there’s still not much movement there.
It’s possible to agree with Klein and others that Presidents have limits to which they can set priorities in national policy, and to say that this President, with an interest in creating a new energy future, has missed a massive opportunity. The fact that the BP oil spill came and went without a move away from the status quo architecture of the US energy system is a testament to that missed opportunity.
However, there probably isn’t even a majority in the massively distorted representation that makes up the Senate for these kinds of changes, let alone 60 votes. The Congress and particularly the Senate deserves much of the blame.
5 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
So why didn’t Obama parlay the BP Oil Disaster into a climate bill?
I don’t fault the decision to do health care first. I just fault how it was done and what the result was. I think that set the tone for the rest of the administration.
Obama was simply a victim of circumstance. He tried, but a president only has so much power, you know. It isn’t like you can just move troops around the country and get stuff done, like you can overseas.
Obama dithered on healthcare for 6 months. Nor is there any law that says that Obama couldn’t move on multiple fronts. However the moment he decided to put climate change on the shelf it was effectively dead. The truth is that the House version Waxman-Markey with its cap and trade, permits given away not sold, offsets, extended timelines, etc. was both too complicated and too little. Remember too that Obama and the Democrats are all corporatists. When you consider that, climate change legislation was never going to happen.
Only four comments here? My God! Bottom line, Servitude to energy purveyors has extracted trillions of dollars from America over generations. The trillions of dollars wasted, a Value, “energy loss,” via a basic liberty, the automobile has severed America’s Achilles tendon. Technology fueled by potential energy replaced the uncompensated slaves and farm animals. Self reliance and innovation create liberty and drive evolution. Monopolies instill needs via illusions designed to created dependence, undermining liberty ultimately leading to servitude. The loss of liberty, reduction in a standard of living, loss of economic productivity are all tied to the pebble in the calm pond scenario. The pebble in this case is the “cost,” of a barrel of oil! Protect the salve-owners?