On Cap-and-Trade in the Senate.
June 30, 2009
I still don’t see it as the same threat that Obamacare is, for several reasons. But even the likelihood that it could survive the Senate still appears remarkably low:
Getting major energy and environmental legislation passed in the House of Representatives isn’t by itself a landmark accomplishment. Been there, done that. In 1993, Democrats passed an energy tax by a vote of 219-213. And doing it again by a similarly razor-thin 219-212 vote — after more than a decade-and-a-half of intense political lobbying, numerous scientific studies, global media attention, Hollywood hectoring and, of course, Al Gore — doesn’t show a whole lot of tangible political progress for green Democrats.
[Why Obama's big economic gamble is failing.]. . . One of Pelosi’s goals also was to get the bill passed without the votes of Democrats who might suffer at the polls in the 2010 midterm elections if they voted for the bill. (Many Democrats suffered for their BTU votes in the 1994 congressional elections when the Republicans won back the House.) Mission accomplished, then. But it speaks poorly for Democratic messaging that cap-and-trade was such a risky vote for so many of the party’s members. It surely would have been better for the current momentum and eventual legislative success of the cap-and-trade bill for it to have passed the House by a wide margin.
. . . The same delicate, precise formula that allowed the bill to succeed in that chamber won’t work in the Senate. For instance, more than a quarter of the bill’s House support came from the California and New York delegations whose members account for a fifth of the House. But those two states, notes Jay Cost of RealClearPolitics, make up just four percent of the Senate. A cap-and-trade bill that can’t pass the House by a big margin probably can’t pass the Senate by even a narrow one.
[Why Obamacare might be flatlining.]. . . And of course, the Senate, where you need 60 votes to end a filibuster, is a different manner of beast. Yes, Senate Democrats currently have 59 votes and seem likely to get a 60th from Minnesota. But there may already be as many as eight Democrats ready to vote against Pelosi’s creation. And as unemployment continues to rise, climate change may sink further down the list of American voters’ priorities and that of centrist senators.
h/t: The Air.
Posted in Uncategorized
Join the 
June 30th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
[...] Little Miss Attila, we see that getting cap-and-trade passed in the Senate is seen as being… [...]
July 1st, 2009 at 8:01 am
Instead of “Cap and Trade” it should be called “Crap and Charade”…. in honor of Algore’s most prominent characteristics.
July 4th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Not a big threat? Who even knows what is in it?? They’re going to regulate every tiny last bit of your life in there. You will be unable to sell your house without doing tens of thousands of dollars of work on it in order to satisfy a bureaucrat. Energy costs will go up, which *will* kill people in extreme temperature. It is another way for the connected to steal your money and give it to their friends. It’s horrific. So is the health care stuff, I admit. But I don’t see a big gulf between them, honestly.