EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Senate Democrats to W.H.: Drop Cap-and-Trade
“I am communicating that in every way I know how,” says Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), one of at least half a dozen Democrats who've told the White House or their own leaders that it's time to jettison the centerpiece of their party's plan to curb global warming.
The creation of an economy-wide market for greenhouse gas emissions is as the heart of the climate bill that cleared the House earlier this year. But with the health care fight still raging and the economy still hurting, moderate Democrats have little appetite for another sweeping initiative — especially another one likely to pass with little or no Republican support.
“We need to deal with the phenomena of global warming, but I think it’s very difficult in the kind of economic circumstances we have right now,” said Indiana Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, who called passage of any economy-wide cap and trade “unlikely.”
At a meeting about health care last month, moderates pushed to table climate legislation in favor of a jobs bill that would be an easier sell during the 2010 elections, according to Senate Democratic aides.
“I’d just as soon see that set aside until we work through the economy,” said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). “What we don’t want to do is have anything get in the way of working to resolve the problems with the economy.”
“Climate change in an election year has very poor prospects,” added Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.). “I’ve told that to the leadership.”
At least some in the Democratic leadership appear to be listening.
Asked about cap-and-trade last week, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said: “At this point I’d like to see a complete bill but we have to be realistic."
Moderate House Democrats who voted in favor of the cap-and-trade bill just before the July 4th recess came under fire back home, and Republicans have vowed to make the issue a key line of attack during next year’s elections.
Some Democrats would prefer to deny them that target.
“I’d prefer to do energy, because I think you could get a really broad consensus on a lot of energy legislation,” said Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) .
But supporters of the climate bill say that cap-and-trade is an inextricable part of any energy package for next year.
“We’ve got to keep them together because they go together,” said Connecticut Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, who infuriated liberals with his opposition to the public option in the health care bill but who's trying to keep cap-and-trade alive in a bipartisan climate bill he's drafting with Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
The White House remains firmly behind an economy-wide cap-and-trade system, which would curb greenhouse gas emissions and create a market for polluters to buy and sell carbon allowances.
“We think that a cap-and-trade mechanism is the best way to achieve the most cost-effective reductions," a senior administration official told reporters last week.
But Kerry raised eyebrows last week when he seemed to hint at some flexibility over the issue.
"I can't tell you the method or the means or amount by which we might price carbon," he told reporters in Copenhagen. "We haven't resolved that issue yet.”
A move away from cap-and-trade would bitterly disappoint the environmental community and many powerful utility companies, who’ve lobbied hard for the system.
Many utilities, investors, and even some consumer companies like Starbucks and Nike believe cap-and-trade will unleash a flood of investments in energy efficiency and renewable fuels like wind, solar, and nuclear power But passage will be a heavy lift -- with few signs of Republican support and mounting concern from the moderate Democrats.
Earlier this month, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) introduced a bill that would replace cap and trade with a system that would set a price on carbon dioxide emissions and return all the revenue to consumers, instead of industry.
And Republican Sens. George Voinovich of Ohio and Richard Lugar of Indiana are examining proposals to cap greenhouse gas emissions only on power plants, coupled with energy efficiency programs for buildings and transportation.
After the tough health care fight, Democratic leadership believes a climate bill must pass with significant bipartisan support or risk leaving the party open to attack during the midterm elections.
“Any bill dealing with energy and climate change will have to be bipartisan to pass,” said Durbin. “Sen. Kerry assures me that there are other (Republicans) that he may have.”
But even among Republicans who believe global warming is a problem, few -- if any -- other than Graham support an economy-wide cap and trade system.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
48 Comments so far
Show AllLike Obama's corporate welfare program disguised as health care "reform", cap and trade will result in increasing, not reducing greenhouse gas, and be will a bonanza for the corporations promoting it, at the expense of the rest of us.
While cap and dividend proposed by Senators Cantwell and Collins might not be THE solution, it would create more incentives to reduce greenhouse gas than cap and trade would.
While the author highlights moderate Democrat and Republian opposition to cap and trade, the "liberal left" that Obama ostracized during health care "reform" legislation is not likely to roll over and accept another corporate giveaway.
raydelcamino
You said it for me. And well.
Not sure how you can call it Obama's health care reform program, ray. It's actually the health industry's program, bought and paid for by lobbyists. Most of the good in the proposals was demolished by Republicans and Blue Dogs.
Heard an interview with James Hansen on Democracy Now! after he published the following op-ed in the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/opinion/07hansen.html). His position seems to support the Cantwell-Collins line of thought. Though I'm not sure how well the details correlate, this seems to be a reasonable proposal, and possibly a way to get some actual bipartisan action on climate change. The only thing that might be a problem is if the rebates are dribbled out month by month. Lower income people would need a large chunk at once to purchase a lower-emissions, lower-gas-use auto or efficient appliance; they would tend to use small payments to pay bills rather than invest in lower carbon technology. It's not a matter of wisdom, but of practicality. When you are on the edge financially, it's extremely hard to set aside money for the future. We need to have some compassion and understanding about this, rather than always blaming the victim.
There must also be investment in updated public transportation in this country so that we can begin weaning people off of dependence on automobiles altogether. My daughter lives in Portland -- a great city for public transit -- but it takes her 6 minutes to drive to work, or 45 minutes by bus. That's quite a deterrent. A high-speed intercity rail system would also give people a choice for long distances and reduce airline congestion.
I've heard/read that cap-and-trade could just result in another humongous financial bubble, so maybe this is a good way to back off from that nightmare.
Thank you -- cogent discussion of some of the issues that will need to be addressed in S2877. The 2 weeks of Democracy Now! broadcast from Copenhagen took their usual in-depth presentation to a whole other level of better understanding of the kind of survival issues that are at hand, the science that supports that survival, and the likelihood of government backing for solutions. The more we can connect with information on useful legislation, businesses who are on-track with 350/1.5, actions to reduce our own emissions,and organisations who are funding local & global survival/green economy growth for those at the lower end of the economic and survival scales, the more we will be able to impact the climate ourselves.
The Collins-Cantwell bill (S. 2877) is available here:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s2877is.txt.pdf
Also on thomas.loc.gov - search for S. 2877 and be sure to hit 'forward' at the bottom of the first page - there is more to it.
It is a relatively short 9 page bill (in the thomas format). This is the bill we need to coalesce around. The current cap-and-trade bill has its many issues, one of the worst of which is removing current EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gasses.
Shelving the House's current bill would be fine with me. Unfortunately, Congress would be doing it for the wrong reasons. Please read the Collins-Cantwell bill and help agitate for its passage. Fee-and-rebate,not cap-and-trade!
Thank you for this specific and helpful information. I've read the bill, spread the information to friends, and written to my Senators.
This is very heartening news. In view of all the revelations coming from the University of East Anglia and other sources, the world really needs to pause and let physicists not associated with the IPCC explore the validity of the global warming threat.
The scientists at the CRU certainly did wrong, and there is evidence that raw temperature data has been tampered with - politicians can't just go on as if this hasn't happened!
There are so many desperate problems in this world, we really can't take the risk of being diverted into 'fixing' a problem that isn't really there - with enormous consequences for the poor - such as biofuels replacing food frops!
David 12:10 ---- The reports concerning U of E.A. were distorted, some in depth reporting reveals it was a tempest in a teapot.
Whereas a vast majority of climatologists agree there is GW, they are unnecessary when one considers only a few simple obvious visually verifiable facts.
Almost all Mountain Glaciers are melting
Artic is melting
Hottest decade in 600,000 years ( Greenland ice cores)
Acidification and temperature rise of Pacific.
"I do'nt need a Weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
No right thinking person would allow the already dicreditated policy of using food lands for biofuels, dozens of positive alternatives are available.
the powers that be will neve rallow palin in the hite hosue....she's aloose cannon... instead we'll be subject to another Bush - JEB. These Bushes have been around running things for well over a hundred years - do you really think they'll just scurry back into the dark?
sam bush(1863- 1948) - railroad exec, governor of the federal reserve of cleveland, rockefeller business associate, buddies w/ benard baruch,
Prescott bush (1895-1972)- banker for the nazi's, senator, skulls and bones memebr that stole geronimo's skull,
george hw bush - OSS member, help start the CIA, ciadirector, congressman, vice president, preident
george w bush (shrub) governor, fronted a cia laundering company, president
and you think these cockroaches will just voluntarily give up power and play nice all of a sudden?
don't count on it.....in fact cheny is starting to push jeb and help him raise money....though you probably won't hear anything until after the 2010 elections....
Capslock and Tirade?
you know when Lieberman, Kerry and Lindsey Graham are all working together the end result is bound to be a big corporate handout with little regard for the supposed reduction in greenhouse gases.
Any climate deal involving these clowns is sure to be BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT!
But good for the corporate bottom-line.
Exactly correct ... Cap and Trade is a sham ...
Agree! See http://www.storyofstuff.com/capandtrade/
These are the same "Democrats" who killed health care reform. To hell with them. Let them run as Republicans and let real Democrats do the best they can. They may even get a president who will help.
Want the scoop on "Cap and Trade" ?
What's Cap and Trade? A New Video Breaks it Down and Reveals the Plan as a Scam ...
http://www.alternet.org/environment/144359/what's_cap_and_trade_a_new_video_breaks_it_down_and_reveals_the_plan_as_a_scam/
So why are the Democrats pushing "Cap and Trade"?
More markets for Wall Street banksters and speculators to manipulate is always good for political donations.
And then there are all the other scams wonderfully laid out in the article ... all good for political donations.
Of course the Republicans are against Cap and Trade because ... well because it will hurt Big Oil and Big Coal ... so they can get political donations ...
The only real solution to CO2 emissions is a carbon tax, but there are no political donations there ...
Register Green Party...
See also Annie Leonard's (The Story of Stuff) explanation of cap and trade.
http://www.storyofstuff.com/capandtrade/
Not a carbon tax--a revenue neutral btu tax. A carbon tax exempts nuclear. New technologies could have a 5 year exemption to level the playing field.
New nuclear is not a problem as long as subsidies are not given ... Nuclear is not cost effective and can't be insured without subsidies ...
What new technologies? Wind, solar, tidal, geothermal are known ... What else is there?
A simple carbon tax based on CO2 emissions with the proceeds distributed per capita to help people with the higher cost of living .... Imports would have tariffs and exports subsidies ... simple ...
"New nuclear is not a problem as long as subsidies are not given..." You are correct except that no one is talking about removing the subsidies. We should, of course, remove all subsidies and enforce all environmental regulations. But all they're talking about is regulating carbon. So, switching to a btu tax gets around everything including the diversionary and divisive debate about CO2. Go for the ends, not the means.
I believe waste heat recovery is a relatively new technology. All the "newer" alternatives should have the exemption since they have barely become competitive. But if we stop subsidizing everything and start enforcing environmental regulations they would be more competitive.
What else is there?" There is stuff going on at MIT but my physics and inorganic chemistry aptitude doesn't let me understand it very well. And who knows what else is out there, no one can predict the future.
Nothing coming out of Washington is simple--measuring CO2 would become a political game. And again, the opposition would go back to the big debate and nothing would get done. They have manufactured an impasse, we have to build a bypass. A simple shift in language to talk about energy conservation instead of CO2 knocks them off balance and changes the debate. No tax that is not revenue neutral will pass this or any other Congress. Al Gore wanted to use the money to offset FICA which would also help poor people.
Democrats are nice little Republicans....
Democrats are useless! Obama is a fraud....Biden is also calling the shots...Biden is scum too.
Name calling is not exactly the most helpful form of dialogue.
Neither is lying when you are smiling.....
How did you like smirking and lying for eight years?
From the article:
"A move away from cap-and-trade would bitterly disappoint the environmental community...."
I'm part of the environmental community and I bitterly oppose cap & Trade. The article names not one pro-cap-&-trade environmental organization.
"Many utilities, investors, and even some consumer companies like Starbucks and Nike believe cap-and-trade will unleash a flood of investments in energy efficiency and renewable fuels like wind, solar, and nuclear power" [sic, no period]
Since when is nuclear power "renewable" like wind and solar (and geothermal and tidal)?
This is insidious journalism. Cap-and-trade must be okay, because "the environmental community" supports it. Nuclear power must be okay because like wind and solar it is "renewable." And why are Starbucks and Nike in the article at all? Are they experts in investment in renewables? Are they corporate leaders on environmental issues? I don't think so!
The more Politico articles I read, the more they read like the print equivalent of FOX News.
-30-
>>>> "I'm part of the environmental community and I bitterly oppose cap & Trade. The article names not one pro-cap-&-trade environmental organization."
Exactly right. CapNTrade is a corporate scam that will only worsen carbon pollution.
Unfortunately, the (leaders of the) Big Green groups (Sierra Club, TWS, etc.) support this boondoggle, once again mistaking protection of the Democratic Party as protection of the environment.
Please note--the Dem's opposition to cap and trade is not that it's mostly silly, it's political. These folks are lobotomized robots. Yes, lacewing, calling names isn't helpful, but sometimes it just feels good.
Forget carbon--CO2 is everywhere and impossible to control.
Stop subsidizing oil, gas and nuclear. Stop building more roads and divert gas taxes to public transportation. Don't we have enough federal highways? It costs a fortune to repair and maintain what we have. Stop subsidizing CAFOs and tell the truth about the source of the E Coli from Hell. Start enforcing the Clean Air Act against coal burning plants. Pass a revenue neutral btu tax. Prioritize and focus.
The best way to get around this crazy CO2 impasse (or any other impasse)is to bypass it.
Anyone who can call Ben Nelson a moderate has lost all credibility with me.
The only really effective control on carbon emissions is a carbon tax. Good luck with that with this corporate owned Congress. They excused the gas industry from the Clean Water Act so now our aquifers are getting poisoned. There is no money too dirty for their sticky fingers.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
BeForKids--We can't have a carbon tax because it excludes nuclear. We need a revenue neutral btu tax, perhaps the only good idea Al Gore ever had. But you're right, it doesn't matter--nothing real will be done. It still amazes me that so many people want to expand the power of this corrupt monstrosity.
The only political focus of anyone should be electoral reform and a corporate personhood amendment. That's the only way to fix it--if we can't get that we can't fix anything.
And the dems throw one more part of the base that put Obama (and them) into office. Is anyone surprised by now.
If this keeps up the Obama will become a one-termer, and see the permemant fracturing of the democratic party.
news flash... Joe Lieberman sheds (I)ndependent status... changes party affiliation... to (C)orporate...
Joe Lieberman announced today he is firmly a member of the (C)orporate party. He explained, "After having been voted down by the Democratic Party registered voters in my home state, I find the (I)ndependent label somewhat misleading; and the (C)orporate party affiliation, for which my positions on the recent Health Care bill clearly established, I am firmly in the camp of the (C)orporate party interests."
Lieberman continued, "I also need to clarify a quote from the article - 'We’ve got to keep them together because they go together,'. What I was referring to was that politicians - POLITICIANS - NOT energy policy; and Corporations "go together".
Lieberman concluded his comments with "I've had to change coats more often than a crowd at a Salvation Army clothing sale, and the (C)orporate party label will give me better brand identity with the body politic."
Asked what Lieberman, as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security, would be doing with regard to the attempted blowing up of a passenger plane Christmas Day in U.S. airspace... Lieberman stated, “I'm going to rework some of the boastings on my Senate website.”
http://lieberman.senate.gov/issues-legislation/homeland-security-and-governmental-affairs/index.html
In 2001, Senator Lieberman drafted the legislation that created the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11 Commission). After the Commission's recommendations were published in July 2004, Senator Lieberman spearheaded the effort to enact them into law. The Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act of 2004 reorganized the nation's intelligence community for the first time in 50 years by creating a strong Director of National Intelligence and a National Counter Terrorism Center
to improve information sharing among the federal government's 15 intelligence agencies
so they would work together
to avoid the kind of intelligence missteps
that preceded the September 11th attacks.
I can't get past the comment "moderate Democrats bruised by the healthcare debate". How were they abused? By a 2 to 1 majority people wanted a strong
public option. So clearly the only bruisers are the conservative very small minority. And why does the author keep referring to "lack of Republican support".....on antything? Did we not learn by being beat about by the head and shoulders that Republicans do not have either the good concious or the political will to cooperate? They have a single goal to obstruct their way back into power and that indeed means they are the ones "falling on their own swords"~! We gave Obama a super majority to make the changes we want and need. He has squandered some of that particular piece of political capital by appeasing a party that is so weakened it does not require him to appease. This is the age of Democrats and that is an inescapable fact. So Obama only need to keep his promises made......PERIOD~!
We definitely have a one party system now.
Now?
Remember when Michael Moore wrote in Stupid White Men that Bill Clinton was the best Republican President we've ever had? Ralph Nader said it too, but then, after January 2001, even though most Democrats were voting yes on most Bush initiatives and the so-called "60 vote requirement" was still unheard of (although it would have been damned useful), it suddenly became really dangerous to keep saying that.
Clinton didn't have a majority of his own party in Congress after '94. But Obama has what we were told is a filibuster-proof majority, and we still have a Republican administration -- this one even has a few actual Republicans in it, which I'm pretty sure Obama didn't tell us was on the agenda while he was a candidate.
The question is this -- how much do I bet that by spring of 2012 it becomes incredibly dangerous to re-state the obvious? Come on now, let's be truthful. Almost all of us will turn into Todd Gitlin as the Republican field narrows.
I won't speak for anyone else, but I certainly understood there would be Republicans in the Obama administration.
And I don't mean to be snarky, it's just that how anyone thought all 60 senators caucusing with the Democrats would go along with the whole Democratic agenda is beyond me. How could anyone who watches politics not know that individual congressmen are more interested in their districts than the party? How could you not know a bunch of Democrats lean to the right and were going to be more hindrance than help in passing parts of the agenda? The conservadems had shown in prior years that they buy into the Republican, and actually I think we should say "conservative" belief, that any bill opposed for passage must be filibustered?
Can we focus? The problem is the Senate is broken. That's not the fault of Obama or the big majority of Democrats. It's going to take time to move DC as far left as the country. It's silly to act like everyone we elected is betraying us.
...with a system that would set a price on carbon dioxide emissions and return all the revenue to consumers, instead of industry, to pay for their healthcare. Obamascare won't do it.
Only in a country with a $14 trillion economy and 300 million people earning $48,000 per capita in a land area of 10 million square miles, can we find substantial numbers of people complaining that they're suffering too much to explore stopping environmental disaster, with multi-millionaire politicians with vast petrochemical portfolios feeling our pain.
Why do they hate us, George? I mean Barack? It's because of our freedoms, right? Right?
If you don't already have a column somewhere, you should.
Bravo!!
Appreciate the appreciation. Sometimes I wish I had a column, but for the most part I'm happy that Bob Herbert and Paul Krugman publish so much of what I've written shortly after I wrote it. People respect it more coming from them. I don't have credentials.
I'm kidding, but just a little bit. In his most recent column, already up here on Common Dreams, Krugman says "So there was a whole lot of nothing going on in measures of economic progress or success. Funny how that happened."
Funny indeed. "Whole Lotta Nuthin' Going On" is the refrain/title of a song I wrote and recorded a few years ago, which when written was a popping of the Disney-inflated Giuliani myth balloon from the perspective of a native New Yorker suffering through his dark mayoralty. Don't be scared -- it's loud, fast and funny, not whiny and depressing like most of today's pop-rock. You can listen to it here:
http://www.myspace.com/theimmortalporpoises or here: www.soundclick.com/theimmortalporpoises
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Cap and trade: Bad. Failed when tried in parts of Europe. Cap and Dividend: Some better.
National energy conservation policy with sufficient government requirements and subsidies: More better. Green New Deal including cap & dividend, reactivating idle domestic manufacturing capacity to EFFECTIVELY support national energy conservation policy, new national green construction laws, energy efficient residential and business structure retrofits, construction of wind-powered electric recharging stations, electric cars, high-tech diesel/electric hybrids, high speed bullet trains and dozens of new urban mass transportation commuter rail systems: Best of all.
METAL -- excellent comments:
your
"National energy conservation policy with sufficient government requirements and subsidies: More better. Green New Deal including cap & dividend, reactivating idle domestic manufacturing capacity to EFFECTIVELY support national energy conservation policy, new national green construction laws, energy efficient residential and business structure retrofits, construction of wind-powered electric recharging stations, electric cars, high-tech diesel/electric hybrids, high speed bullet trains and dozens of new urban mass transportation commuter rail systems: Best of all."
is the heart of the matter - radical changes. wholesale changes -- ALL LEADING TO and CREATING JOBS ....
which of course ISN"T the course these Corporatocratic business as usual Democrats "do".
their idea of "jobs" is more jobs that are paying LESS than ever before -- for the SAME old FAILED economic model.
that's what they worry "about".
their idea of "jobs" is 19th century.
it's not "caps and trade" they are really saying isn't "practical right now" ...
that's just CODE for
NOT DOING ANYTHING about the environment - and anything about JOBS that SAVE the environment AND the economy by saving the environment -- a jobs program that MUST CHANGE the ECONOMIC SYSTEM - that pays RESPECT to the EARTH.
that's what they really are saying "isn't a practical caps and trade bill right now".
they are simply using the nomenclature of the moment:
"caps and trade" as a COVER to avoid dealing with the environment by creating the jobs that DO deal with the environment.
yet they use the "caps and trade" as an excuse that it's a "distraction"
from ......re-election...as the "Democrat" CORPORATE SWINDLERS that they really are.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
If the oat cakes, tea leaves and gut pangs I've been reading are correct, then Team rObotma and the corporate oligarchs, their political back-stabbers and media traitors are going to throw down the gauntlet to struggling Amurkans next year and basically dare them to do anything about it. The Pentagon has its 2 year old North American Command (exempt from posse comitatus) set with at least two divisions that I've heard of; national surveillance and more and more police forces receiving military grade LRADs. The whole thing smells like a domestic economic trap with its jaws about to clamp shut and the military, police and media ready to crush any attempt at an effective resistance and label anyone or anything that gets in their way as "terrorist"--the same way Arnold Schwartzenegger labeled college students who temporarily took over California school buildings to protest huge jumps in their tuition.
First the DLC Judas Squad is going to roll out a planned, inadequate 2nd "jobs stimulus" bill that will be over a Trillion dollars short and contain no New Deal type government work programs like the CCC or WPA. There will be a slight spring & summer bump in job growth but 10 to 15 million too few new jobs. By July or August consumer spending will sputter; consumer savings for those suffering foreclosures and unemployment will be bleeding out; the adverse effects of repeated gaps in unemployment benefit tiers on our new class of long-term unemployed will start piling up. The deflationary spiral will start to kick back in with a vengeance by next September & October. Half the States are once again running out of funds to pay for unemployment benefits in a second wave of under-funding and will run to the Federal government for help. If the DLC has a shred of cunning left they MAY try a 3rd booster shot of "job stimulus" spending in late July or August just to make it to the November elections, then again, they may be too stupid to even do that.
The campaign finance fix is in for the loathsome squatting bulk of the DLC "leadership" and they know, depending on how historically liberal their home base regions & districts are, that they'll be protected even if oodles of Dimocrat small-fry in Congress get thrown out. The "leadership" is insulated regardless of how badly they screw up the country. Even if they "fail" they get golden parachutes for life and revolving door opportunities to work as lobbyists making more money than they ever did in Congress.
Secondly, when the bogus 2nd "jobs stimulus" bill predictably withers in 1 or 2 business quarters, they are going to initially claim that any more spending on job creation is fiscally "dangerous" and will worsen the deficit and harm the economy. [They won't be talking about the real economy here but their TARP-inflated stock market & derivatives speculation economy that's keeping dividends flowing for the wealthiest 33% of Amurkans.]
Thirdly, if and only if there is sufficient evidence that they are going take heavy losses in the 2010 elections, then they might pass a 3rd inadequate "jobs stimulus" supplemental appropriations bill but they will "make it clear" (with media help from all the usual media goons) that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid must "undergo serious review and reform" in order to restrain our enormous deficits and "keep the markets healthy."
Fourthly, over time both Parties and the corporate media are going to indoctrinate the public into accepting that it's "impossible" for the government to create enough jobs to substantially bring down unemployment; that they don't have sufficient funds to pay for all the job training necessary to train people for whatever jobs they could create--especially if they were too "demanding" or involved substantial overhead to re-tool for manufacturing jobs here in the U.S. So, the
public will be told, 10% to 15% unemployment (17% to 21% real unemployment) must be "the new norm." Our insane 6 to 1 ratio between empty homes and numbers of homeless Americans (respectively) may grow to a 7 to 1 ratio. But the only home buyers benefiting from it will be well-educated, highly-skilled foreign workers and their families who bring the money to buy their choice of deluxe homes in from outside the country.
Every drip of our Chinese water torture economy will be used by our ruling oligarchs and their political and media purple-assed baboons as an all-purpose excuse for (1) more and more sacrifices in government programs from the bottom 40% to 50% of the income food chain, (2) suppression of any follow-up attempt to reform health care to reduce or eliminate the role of private corporate insurers, (3) any effective move to mitigate or adapt to global warming, (4) any attempt to bring our sundry wars to a quick and decisive end (and thereby ratchet up our severe unemployment with too many military personnel returning from their militarized economy into our jobless domestic economy).
Things could get very ugly very quick.
In order to have outcomes appropriate to a successful society, we must at some point start to make decisions AS IF COMMON SENSE MATTERED, and not expediency, greed, fear, etc.
Here’s an example.
Oil is a finite resource.
We are either at peak oil by ordinary means of extraction, or pre-peak oil by extraordinary means.
We can see the end of an oil-based economy.
The oil industry etal tell us there is nothing to be concerned about re global warming/ climate change. Say that they are correct. That means there will be no game-changing disturbance of the status quo, from Nature anyway, and we may as well keep burning and making throw-away things of the stuff until the market drives us to different energy sources according to the current corporate profit-oriented paradigm.
That assumes a free and informed market, neither of which exists, or is likely to exist anytime soon.
We have new information about how our planet works. We can watch things melt. We can analyze physical geological, archeological evidence that suggests the burning of hydrocarbons is problematic.
Oil is really useful.
Maybe we should stop burning it.
Here's another from an article below:
Ronnie Cummins | Beyond the Darkest Hours, Grassroots Rising
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/26-0
Snydly writes:
"We have new information about how our planet works. We can watch things melt. We can analyze physical geological, archeological evidence that suggests the burning of hydrocarbons is problematic.
Oil is really useful.
Maybe we should stop burning it."
Exactly so. Someone wrote several years ago that our grandchildren would look back on this era and exclaim, "You burned oil?" when as a hydrocarbon chemical precursor its value is orders of magnitude greater than as a fuel?
Efficiency of "markets"? Yeah. Sure.
Kill me once, shame on you; kill me twice...
Deadly Idiots.
So long as the "laws of economics" bear little relationship to the Laws of Physics we remain in trouble.
-30-
Cap and trade is a scam being put forward by the capitalist class. It offers no real solution to the problems of climate change. It's a good thing if it doesn't make its way through Congress.
What is required is a carbon tax on industrial polluters without the ability for them to pass on this cost to consumers. The tax collected would then be used to promote and advance sustainable alternative energy supplies and directly assist the working class to adjust to a fossil-free economy.
"Senate Democrats are urging the White House to give up now."
Give up now and give up often...beat the cowardly rush! Be the first in your neighbourhood to fly the white flag of freedom!