They want your blood and they will take it...

[Nightshade]

Make no mistake: this bill will bring you to misery. Mark those words. Every last thing will cost more- even as inflation increases, \"Cap and Trade\" will compound loss of jobs, loss of money and increase cost of living to the point where it will make you wish you were never born.

House Democrats win key test vote on climate bill

Jun 26 12:03 PM US/Eastern
By H. JOSEF HEBERT and DINA CAPPIELLO
Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democrats narrowly won a key test vote Friday on sweeping legislation to combat global warming and usher in a new era of cleaner energy. Republicans said the bill included \"the largest tax increase in American history.\"

The vote was 217-205 to advance the White House-backed legislation to the floor, and 30 Democrats defected, a reflection of the controversy the bill sparked.


The legislation would impose limits for the first time on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollution from power plants, factories and refineries. It also would force a shift from coal and other fossil fuels to renewable and more efficient forms of energy. Supporters and opponents agreed the result would be higher energy costs, but disagreed widely on the impact on consumers.

President Barack Obama has made the measure a top priority of his first year in office. The president, along with White House aides and House Democratic leaders, scrambled for the votes to assure passage. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has pledged to get the legislation passed before lawmakers leave on their July 4 vacation.

The Senate has yet to act on the measure, and a major struggle is expected.

In the House, the bill's fate depended on the decisions of a few dozen fence-sitting Democrats, mainly conservatives and moderates from contested districts who feared the political ramifications of siding with the White House and their leadership on the measure.

Democrats left little or nothing to chance. Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., confirmed by the Senate on Thursday to an administration post, put off her resignation from Congress until after the final vote on the climate change bill.

\"The bill contains provisions to protect consumers, keep costs low, help sensitive industries transition to a clean energy economy and promote domestic emission reduction efforts,\" the White House in a statement of support for the legislation.

Republicans saw it differently.

This \"amounts to the largest tax increase in American history under the guise of climate change,\" said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.

While the bill would impose a \"cap-and-trade\" system that would force higher energy costs, Republicans for weeks have branded it an energy tax on every American.

But Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said there was a \"moral imperative to be good stewards of the earth.\"

The legislation, totaling about 1,200 pages, would require the U.S. to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and about 80 percent by the next century.

U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are rising at about 1 percent a year and are predicted to continue increasing without mandatory caps.

Under the bill, the government would limit heat-trapping pollution from factories, refineries and power plants. It would distribute pollution allowances that could be bought and sold, depending on whether a facility exceeds the cap or makes greater pollution cuts than are required.

Obama on Thursday called it \"a vote of historic proportions ... that will open the door to a clean energy economy\" and green jobs. \"It will create millions of new jobs,\" Pelosi insisted.

Both Obama and Pelosi preferred to focus on the economic issues rather than on what environmentalists view as the urgency of reducing carbon emissions blamed for global warming.

The Rust Belt coal-state Democrats who have been sitting on the fence worry about how to explain their vote for higher energy prices to people back home—and how the vote might play out in elections next year.

Republicans have been quick to exploit those concerns.

\"Democratic leaders are poised to march many moderate Democrats over a cliff ... by forcing them to vote for a national energy tax that is unpopular throughout the heartland,\" Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said.

There was widespread agreement that under this cap-and-trade system, the cost of energy would almost certainly increase. But Democrats argued that much of the impact on taxpayers would be offset by other provisions in the bill. Low-income consumers would qualify for credits and rebates to cushion the impact on their energy bills.

Two reports issued this week—one from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the other from the Environmental Protection Agency—seemed to support that argument.

The CBO analysis estimated that the bill would cost an average household $175 a year; the EPA put it at between $80 and $110 a year.

Republicans questioned the validity of the CBO study and noted that even that analysis showed actual energy production costs increasing $770 per household. Industry groups have cited other studies showing much higher cost to the economy and to individuals.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

[Foil]

TB, posting concerns about legislation is fine. There seem to be some good reasons for it in this case.

But, \"...it will make you wish you were never born.\"??

[Will Robinson]

I don't know about wishing I was never born but it sure does make me wonder how the hell we ended up under the influence of so many STUPID people?!?

The energy tax disguised as an energy bill is so bad that it truly seems surreal to me to watch it play out.

Obama even said it would send energy prices through the roof if he gets it passed. No scientist can show how the Cap and Trade scam will lower the production of pollution it merely allows government to collect more revenue. The bill itself even has a provision in it to send rebates back to the poor to offset the cost each and every person will have to pay.

The only beneficiary to this bill is government itself!

No, I don't wish I was never born but it has me wishing I was in charge of scheduling retroactive abortions...

[Nightshade]

UPDATE: House narrowly passes major energy-climate bill

Write/CALL your senator NOW. You must get them to oppose this bill before it's too late. I hate to sound dire, but when it comes to money- it will suck the life out of you when energy will be taxed. Costs will rise for EVERYTHING you buy. The poor will be especially hard hit by this dreadful tax.

By H. JOSEF HEBERT and DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 17 mins ago

WASHINGTON – In a triumph for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed sweeping legislation Friday that calls for the nation's first limits on pollution linked to global warming and aims to usher in a new era of cleaner, yet more costly energy.

The vote was 219-212, capping months of negotiations and days of intense bargaining among Democrats. Republicans were overwhelmingly against the measure, arguing it would destroy jobs in the midst of a recession while burdening consumers with a new tax in the form of higher energy costs.

The House's action fulfilled Speaker Nancy Pelosi's vow to clear major energy legislation before July 4, and sent the measure to a highly uncertain fate in the Senate.

Obama lobbied recalcitrant Democrats by phone from the White House as the debate unfolded across several hours, and Al Gore posted a statement on his Web site saying the measure represents \"an essential first step towards solving the climate crisis.\" The former vice president won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work drawing attention to the destructive potential of global warming.

On the House floor, Democrats hailed the legislation as historic, while Republicans said it would damage the economy without solving the nation's energy woes.

It is \"the most important energy and environmental legislation in the history of our country,\" said Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts. \"It sets a new course for our country, one that steers us away from foreign oil and towards a path of clean American energy.\"

But Rep. John Boehner, the House Republican leader, used an extraordinary one-hour speech shortly before the final vote to warn of unintended consequences in what he said was a \"defining bill.\" He called it a \"bureaucratic nightmare\" that would cost jobs, depress real estate prices and put the government into parts of the economy where it now has no role.

The legislation would require the U.S. to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by about 80 percent by mid-century. That was slightly more aggressive than Obama originally wanted, 14 percent by 2020 and the same 80 percent by mid-century.

U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are rising at about 1 percent a year and are predicted to continue increasing without mandatory limits.

Under the bill, the government would limit heat-trapping pollution from factories, refineries and power plants and issue allowances for polluters. Most of the allowances would be given away, but about 15 percent would be auctioned by bid and the proceeds used to defray higher energy costs for lower-income individuals and families.

\"Some would like to do more. Some would like to do less,\" House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said in advance of the final vote. \"But we have reached a compromise ... and it is a compromise that can pass this House, pass that Senate, be signed by the president and become law and make progress.\"

One of the biggest compromises involved the near total elimination of an administration plan to sell pollution permits and raise more than $600 billion over a decade — money to finance continuation of a middle class tax cut. About 85 percent of the permits are to be given away rather than sold in a ceoncession to energy companies and their allies in the House — and even that is uncertain to survive in the Senate.

The final bill also contained concessions to satisfy farm-state lawmakers, ethanol producers, hydroelectric advocates, the nuclear industry and others, some of them so late that they were not made public until 3 a.m. on Friday.

Supporters and opponents agreed the result would be higher energy costs but disagreed vigorously on the impact on consumers. Democrats pointed to two reports — one from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the other from the Environmental Protection Agency — that suggested average increases would be limited after tax credits and rebates were taken into account. The CBO estimated the bill would cost an average household $175 a year, the EPA $80 to $110 a year.

Republicans questioned the validity of the CBO study and noted that even that analysis showed actual energy production costs increasing $770 per household. Industry groups have cited other studies showing much higher costs to the economy and to individuals.

The White House and congressional Democrats argued the bill would create millions of \"green jobs\" as the nation shifts to greater reliance on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar and development of more fuel-efficient vehicles — and away from use of fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal.

It will \"make our nation the world leader on clean energy jobs and technology,\" declared Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who negotiated deals with dozens of lawmakers in recent weeks to broaden the bill's support.

Pelosi, D-Calif., took an intense personal interest in the measure, sitting through hours of meetings with members of the rank and file and nurturing fragile compromises.

At its heart, the bill was a trade-off, less than the White House initially sought though it was more than Republicans said was acceptable. Some of the dealmaking had a distinct political feel. Rep. Alan Grayson, a first-term Democrat, won a pledge of support that $50 million from the proceeds of pollution permit sales in the bill would go to a proposed new hurricane research facility in his district in Orlando, Fla.

\"This is revolutionary. This is a moment in history,\" declared Markey, a co-sponsor of the bill.

Republicans saw it differently.

This \"amounts to the largest tax increase in American history under the guise of climate change,\" declared Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090626/ap_ ... imate_bill

[Spidey]

I wish they did want blood, that I can spare.

[woodchip]

From Bloomberg,com:

By Gianluca Baratti

\"March 27 (Bloomberg) -- Subsidizing renewable energy in the U.S. may destroy two jobs for every one created if Spain’s experience with windmills and solar farms is any guide.

For every new position that depends on energy price supports, at least 2.2 jobs in other industries will disappear, according to a study from King Juan Carlos University in Madrid.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s 2010 budget proposal contains about $20 billion in tax incentives for clean-energy programs. In Spain, where wind turbines provided 11 percent of power demand last year, generators earn rates as much as 11 times more for renewable energy compared with burning fossil fuels.

The premiums paid for solar, biomass, wave and wind power - - which are charged to consumers in their bills -- translated into a $774,000 cost for each Spanish “green job” created since 2000, said Gabriel Calzada, an economics professor at the university and author of the report.

“The loss of jobs could be greater if you account for the amount of lost industry that moves out of the country due to higher energy prices,” he said in an interview.

Spain’s Acerinox SA, the nation’s largest stainless-steel producer, blamed domestic energy costs for deciding to expand in South Africa and the U.S., according to the study.

“Microsoft and Google moved their servers up to the Canadian border because they benefited from cheaper energy there,” said the professor of applied environmental economics.\"

So like socialised medicine all we have to do is look at other countries who have jumped on the Green Revolution and see what the real costs are,

[Spidey]

Yea, and you can add in the 300-500 billion needed to upgrade the transmission lines. (because of remote generation)

I was listening to one of those weenies in Congress the other day, talking about how we will have all of these “American” built windmills running…lol. (can you guess, or even know where most of the windmills are being built)

[woodchip]

they are being built in Spain

[woodchip]

Also I find this interesting:

\"In the Republicans' weekly radio and Internet address, House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio said, \"By imposing a tax on every American who drives a car or flips on a light switch, this plan will drive up the prices for food, gasoline and electricity.\"

But Obama said the measure would cost the average American about the price of a postage stamp per day.\"

Wasn't it Obama and his esteemed panel of experts that said if we hurried up and passed the stimulus package that the national unemployment rate wouldn't go past 8% ?

[Spidey]

I heard a rumor that postage stamps are going up to $50 soon…

[Zantor]

We can thank the federal government. They are in the process of signing the financial death warrant of our country!

[TechPro]

I voted for the other guy.

[Insurrectionist]

Well that is what happens when you put Activists in Congress.

A popular epithet directed by some members of society, including some members of Congress, toward the judiciary involves the denunciation of “activist judges.” Generally, the definition of an “activist judge” is one who decides the outcome of a controversy before him according to personal conviction, even one sincerely held, as opposed to the dictates of the law as constrained by legal precedent and, ultimately, our Constitution. In resolving the Schiavo controversy it is my judgment that, despite sincere and altruistic motivation, the legislative and executive branches of our government have acted in a manner demonstrably at odds with our Founding Fathers’ blueprint for the governance of a free people — our Constitution.

Now the activists in congress want to put Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court. I do believe she will be an activist judge.

[Sergeant Thorne]

I do believe she will be an activist judge.

Yeah, I think that's pretty clear. How disgusting...

[Nightshade]

The democrats looked at the catholic church's soridid trade in indulgences in the past and thought, \"hmm...that was a great SCAM! Let's call them 'Carbon Credits' and sell \"forgiveness.\"

Scam is exactly what this bill is about...from global warming to carbon credits- its all about the money, never about fixing anything or helping the people of the country.

[Will Robinson]

It's just like the tax they forced into the phone bill.
Without having to pass a tax in the form of legislation that they would have to own up to they simply force an industry into paying them fees for something knowing full well the industry will pass the cost onto the consumer...WHAM instant revenue increase and no one has to admit to having voted for a tax!

In this case they even get to puff up their chest and say 'We stuck it to those evil corporations for polluting...' AND they built into the plan a cash payout to the poor to buy votes...er...uh...I mean offset some of the additional cost the poor will pay in energy expenses. So they get two of their favorite things, a punishment to the corporations and a transfer of wealth from the producers to the lower class. But that payout won't come close to covering the other increases in prices across the board that everyone will have to pay.

Here's an example, because of this scam I will be raising my prices to cover my extra costs for energy and all other supplies and product I buy to resell.

Brilliant move Obama, economy in the tank so you hold it's head underwater to be sure it drowns!!
But hey! You sound real eloquent when you lie and you stuck it to the evil rich didn't you?!? So it's all good for you with the dumbmasses

Stupid Obama supporters thanks a bunch for the change!@$#!
If the Senate passes this we're screwed.

[Bet51987]

Gee, If Obama wins, (I hope) I wonder what will happen to the once close relationship between Republicans and fossil fuel companies. I mean all that hard lobbying and money spent trying to prove climate scientists wrong and all. Well except \"their\" scientists....

Bee

[Spidey]

The only thing that will change is…the price of living.

My guess is…up.

[TechPro]

Truth is, either way the price will be going up. Now what does everyone figure to do about that?

[Spidey]

Do without…what else.

In an ideal world, you could reinvent or adapt the economy, and life goes on. The problem I see with that is, the environment that creates entrepreneurs is being destroyed, not encouraged.

The economy needs jobs with good incomes, but nobody seems to know how to create them, a skill that seems to be lacking, and is not taught in the schools. They still use the models invented by people like Henry Ford, for an environment that needed workers, not job creators.

[snoopy]

Truth is, either way the price will be going up. Now what does everyone figure to do about that?

Really, when it came to energy & environmental policy, I liked the ideology behind Bush's approach: Build for the future by fueling research into cost-effective & more environmentally responsible methods to generate energy.

It may not pay off all that much in the next couple years, but assuming that research provides breakthroughs, it'll pay off more in the long run than just taxing people for polluting.

[Insurrectionist]

Gee, If Obama wins, (I hope) I wonder what will happen to the once close relationship between Republicans and fossil fuel companies. I mean all that hard lobbying and money spent trying to prove climate scientists wrong and all. Well except "their" scientists....

Bee

Donations to Democrats this year, who control the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, have already eclipsed 2006 totals by 18 percent, with Democratic candidates accepting $4,395,551 through the first quarter of 2008 compared to a 2006 total of $3,576,445. THe number of donations are still climbing seems who ever is in power gets more and more donations from big oil.

[CUDA]

Gee, If Obama wins, (I hope) I wonder what will happen to the once close relationship between Republicans and fossil fuel companies. I mean all that hard lobbying and money spent trying to prove climate scientists wrong and all. Well except "their" scientists....

Bee

Donations to Democrats this year, who control the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, have already eclipsed 2006 totals by 18 percent, with Democratic candidates accepting $4,395,551 through the first quarter of 2008 compared to a 2006 total of $3,576,445. THe number of donations are still climbing seems who ever is in power gets more and more donations from big oil.

political donations are just a PC way of doing this

bribe (brīb)
n.

1. Something, such as money or a favor, offered or given to a person in a position of trust to influence that person's views or conduct.

[Bet51987]

Donations to Democrats this year, who control the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, have already eclipsed 2006 totals by 18 percent, with Democratic candidates accepting $4,395,551 through the first quarter of 2008 compared to a 2006 total of $3,576,445. THe number of donations are still climbing seems who ever is in power gets more and more donations from big oil.

But you left out the rest of the quote in bold...

Donations to Democrats this year, who control the Senate and U.S. House of Representatives, have already eclipsed 2006 totals by 18 percent, with Democratic candidates accepting $4,395,551 through the first quarter of 2008 compared to a 2006 total of $3,576,445. Republicans are still largely on the receiving end of oil and gas donations, though, accepting $12,650,059 in this cycle and a total of $16,570,858 in 2006.

Bee

[Insurrectionist]

Can I get an Amen

[Insurrectionist]

yea so

[Bet51987]

Can I get an Amen

Maybe next time...

Bee

[Insurrectionist]

It's just like you when you leave out the fact that democrats are takeing the same money. the amen was for cudas response.

[Bet51987]

It's just like you...

[woodchip]

Gee, If Obama wins, (I hope)
Bee

Bee, while it is nice you live at home, when you do get out on your own and have to pay your own heat/electrical/food/transportation costs/rent/clothes/health care...watch how all these things increase in cost if your hopes are realized.