John Edwards Opposes Lieberman-Warner Polluter Giveway

[jsamuel]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/1/133515/089

Edwards Opposes Lieberman-Warner Polluter Giveway
by TomP
Thu Nov 01, 2007 at 01:03:41 PM CDT

Friends of the Earth and Moveon.org oppose the Lieberman-Warner bill that was passed earlier today by a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works. This bill gives hundred of billions of dollars away to corporate polluters.

John Edwards today joined them in opposition to the Lieberman-Warner Polluter Giveaway bill now in the Senate.

Edwards opposes Lieberman-Warner because the bill "gives away pollution permits to industry for free – a massive corporate windfall – instead of doing what is right and selling them so that we can use these resources to invest in clean energy research and help regular families go green."

More after the fold.

[liskddksil]

1. Edwards leads on another issue! nt

[karynnj]

7. self- delete

[Nutmegger]

2. R&K #6!

:thumbsup::bounce::applause::kick:

[laureloak]

3. Leiberman - is he even an American? n/t

[sakabatou]

4. He seems to be stuck in a time before FDR

[DCKit]

6. Robber Barons and Corrrupt Politicians.... We're living in the 18th century. nt

[karynnj]

5. The question is can we get a better bill

Kerry explained some of that bill to the UN conference via phone last month before it was finished last month. (link: http://www.net.org/warming/climate-negotiations-briefing.vtml) What Edwards is speaking of is a cap and trade policy - the first measure to put an economic cost on creating carbon - and it may be the best they can get at this point.
Boxer and Kerry are heading the US delegation to Bali. In a speech at the CRF, Kerry spoke of how they are optimistic that they will be able to involve China this time.

Link to audio of Kerry's speech:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/14661/conversation_with_john_kerry_audio.html
Link to Prepared text:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2158223&mesg_id=2158223


Edwards may be wrong that it is a "massive corporate windfall". It may be just the opposite, companies are being given a quota on how much they can put in the air - there is no limit now. This puts on economic cost on putting carbon in the air. Companies spending the investment dollars to use future new and cleaner ways to produce power can sell their quota. This lowers the cost to the company of adopting the new, more expensive technology. That creates increased demand for new technology - because it is in effect cheaper than it was without this plan. Al Gore is for both a Cap and trade program and a carbon tax.

Cap and trade was successfully used to cut sulfur emissions that caused acid rain, which was a major environmental problem on the east coast in the 1980s. The cap and trade program put in place by the New Enland governors and leaders of the Eastern Canada provinces worked and their program (proposed by a MA Lt Governor, whose cousin was the environmental minister in France) was copied in the Clean Air Act.

It may be that it is too watered down, but, if it can't be improved, it may be better than the status quo.