The Senate Senses Warming: Debates on Global Climate Change

Since June 21, 2005, the Senate has been debating the energy bill, legislation that hopes to increase domestic energy production. The bill is large and multifaceted, but so far, much of the debate has revolved around the government’s responsibility to limit greenhouse gases.

Many of the amendments offered have been concerned with reducing carbon dioxide emissions, demonstrating that the Senate is more concerned with global climate change than it has been in years past. However, by defeating any amendments that could cost industry, the Senate has shown its reluctance to embrace sweeping changes.

The McCain/Lieberman amendment

Two of the Senate’s moderate all-stars, John McCain (R- Arizona) and Joseph Lieberman (D- Connecticut), reintroduced their 2003 proposal to cap greenhouse gas emissions at year 2000 levels by 2010. The measure was defeated, just as it was two years ago, but this time by larger margins. In 2003, the vote was 43-55, and on Wednesday it was 38-60.

On the surface, it appears that the Senate has become less interested in combating CO2 emissions, but the vote actually reflects another complication: some Democrats’ unwillingness to support new language that created incentives for nuclear power.

In hopes of gaining more votes from the Republican side, McCain and Lieberman added a nuclear power provision to their 2005 version of the amendment. But instead of gaining votes, they lost them. Four Democrats who backed the 2003 measure withdrew their support: Barbara Boxer of California, Mark Dayton of Minnesota, Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, and Tom Harkin of Iowa.

Some Republicans who voted against the measure recognized global warming as a serious issue, but felt that the specifics of the amendment were unrealistic. For example, Republican Mike DeWine of Ohio stated that Congress has an obligation to lower emissions for the sake of future generations, but that the measure’s 2010 due date was impractical.

However, Senators did adopt a non-binding agreement to express the "sense of the Senate" on global warming. They agreed that global climate change is a problem and that emissions must be slowed by market-based measures.

The global warming "hoax"

Although the Senate body has communicated its concern over global warming, some individual senators disagree that it’s an issue that demands attention.

James M. Inhofe, Republican of Oklahoma, believes global warming to be a "hoax" that’s causing unwarranted "hysteria." Inhofe, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, refused a new version of the Clean Air Act earlier this year because it addressed carbon dioxide emissions.

The Bush administration used to share Inhofe’s views, but has recently accepted global warming as a real and serious threat. The White House opposes any emissions caps, however, which puts President Bush at odds with the "Sense of the Senate."

For the first time, the Republican-controlled Senate is on record as approving of mandatory emissions caps.

This discord between the Senate and the White House was just what Pete Domenici (R- New Mexico) was hoping to avoid when he backed away from a deal with fellow New Mexico Senator Jeff Bingaman (D).

The Domenici/Bingaman amendment

Domenici and Bingaman worked on a plan to tie industrial emissions to the growth of the economy, resulting in more modest regulations than those proposed by McCain and Lieberman. The measure had a chance at success, but Domenici pulled away for fear of dividing the Republican Party and creating conflict with the Bush administration.

Although the amendment never saw the Senate floor, it may have drawn support away from the McCain/Lieberman measure. Republicans who are concerned about the impact of emissions regulations on industry may be holding out for a milder solution, like the failed Domenici/Bingaman agreement.

However, the Senate did adopt a separate Bingaman plan to require utilities companies to generate at least 10 percent of their energy from renewable sources like solar and wind by the year 2020. The Senate also approved an amendment by Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) that uses tax and loan incentives instead of mandates to encourage companies to decrease smokestack smog.

McCain and Lieberman have criticized Hagel’s plan, saying it won’t do anything to stop climate change. Quoted in Congressional Quarterly, Lieberman refers to the Hagel plan as "fiddling while the Earth is warming."

Should Congress do more to address global climate change? Are you in favor of emissions caps that may cost companies? Do you agree that global warming is a "hoax"? What does it mean when our representatives don’t agree on the consequences of pollution?

What do you think?

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don’t want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue. To log onto our blog, click here.

WomenMatter encourages women to educate themselves on the issues and then approach their representatives with ideas.

Even though the election is over, your voice is vital. Make sure your leaders know what’s important to you. To see how your representatives vote and to contact them, click here.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We launch after school GirlsMatter Clubs in middle and high schools to grow the next generation of politically aware women through a full curriculum and startup kit on girlsmatter.com.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.
• We provide partnerships with nonpartisan organizations that provide services to women and advocate for them.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women’s lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.

Article Posted on: 6/25/2005