Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JakeStraw who wrote (484347)	10/31/2003 9:22:53 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Gregg, Sununu split NH vote on global warming. Senate rejects cap on emissions linked to global warming Gregg, Sununu split on vote Friday, October 31, 2003 By ERIC PIANIN The Washington Post -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WASHINGTON - The Senate yesterday rejected a proposal for mandatory caps on "greenhouse gas" emissions from utilities and other industries in the first congressional test of political sentiment toward global warming since President Bush took office. The 55-43 vote in the Republican-controlled Senate was anticipated in the face of strong opposition from the White House, utilities, the auto industry and conservatives. The administration said it opposed the bill because it would require "deep and immediate cuts in fossil fuel use" to meet an "arbitrary" goal and would drive up home utility bills and gasoline prices. "A majority of the Senate today told the American people that mandatory carbon dioxide reductions are unacceptable, and rightly so," said Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. "The science underlying this bill has been repudiated, the economic costs are far too high and the environmental benefits are nonexistent." However, proponents were heartened by support from Democrats and some Republicans from major industrial and coal-producing states, where opposition to the legislation generally runs high. Many predicted that the legislation eventually will be adopted. "It really means that the people in this country and many in Congress are interested in our doing something about climate change," said Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. New Hampshire's senators split their votes on the bill, with Senator Judd Gregg voting for it and Sen. John Sununu voting against. Gregg described the amendment as one step toward protecting New Hampshire's natural environment. "Global warming and the emission of greenhouse gases have the potential to severely impact almost every aspect of the health of our environment in the short and long-term," Gregg said in a written statement. "Without addressing the emissions from utilities, manufacturers and factories, New Hampshire will continue to suffer as the repository for air pollution from the Midwest and continue to be known as the tailpipe of our nation." Sununu was the only New England senator to vote against the bill. "It's admirable that on this very contentious act that Sen. Gregg has taken the leadership and crossed party lines against the administration's advice," said Jan Pendlebury, director of the New Hampshire office of the National Environmental Trust, who had been lobbying Gregg and Sununu offices on this vote for months. Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, who co-sponsored the bill with Connecticut Democratic Sen. Joseph Lieberman, said, "I want to assure my colleagues we will be back." Their bill would hold greenhouse gas emissions by utilities, major industries and refineries to 2000 levels but allow companies to buy pollution credits from lesser industrial polluters to meet their targets. To draw more support, the sponsors dropped more ambitious targets for emissions reductions for later years and offered more generous exemptions for the auto industry, farmers and others. Myron Ebell of the anti-regulatory Competitive Enterprise Institute said McCain and Lieberman "inflated" their vote by doing "everything they could to cut special deals." The Senate last acted on global warming in 1997 when, by a 95-0 vote, it rejected key principles underlying an international climate change treaty that was being negotiated in Kyoto, Japan. Yesterday, six Republicans joined with 36 Democrats and independent James Jeffords of Vermont to support the McCain-Lieberman measure. It marked the first time the Senate has formally considered mandatory controls on greenhouse gas emissions, which many scientists consider a key contributor to the Earth's rising temperature. The six Republicans were Gregg, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Olympia Snowe of Maine and McCain. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, bucked strong opposition from his coal-producing state to support the measure, as did Lugar and Evan Bayh, an Indiana Democrat. Democrats Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Dick Durbin of Illinois also backed the bill, despite well-organized resistance from automakers and other industrial sectors in their states. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Monitor reporter Daniel Barrick contributed to this report.) Bush triggered a firestorm of protest from Democrats, environmentalists and European leaders in 2001 by abandoning a campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions and then disavowing the Kyoto climate treaty. Since then, the administration has clashed with Democrats and some Republicans over the best way to deal with rising temperatures. The White House has called for more research and voluntary industry programs. Others are impatient. "The president fiddled while the globe continues to warm," Lieberman said. David Hawkins of the Natural Resources Defense Council called the outcome "a very strong vote" for mandatory controls, while Fred Krupp of Environmental Defense said, "The basis for a winning hand in the Senate is on the table." They noted that it took nearly 10 years for Congress to take action on acid rain and predicted it will take much less time to pass climate-change legislation. Friday, October 31, 2003