This came from Senator Johann's office and Dawson Power is happy to tell all of our followers (and customers) that Senator Johann's totally understands the negative impact that cap and trade legislation will have on our agricultural communities. We applaud you Senator Johanns!
Principles Not Politics on Cap-Trade
Support has faded for a Senate cap-and-trade bill that taxes greenhouse gas emissions. Headlines like "Democrats Call Off Climate Bill Effort" indicate that legislators listened to their constituents, who reject further burdensome cost increases on aspects of everyday life.
But this battle isn't over. There is talk of reviving cap-and-trade with a strategy that circumvents regular order in the Senate, as well as the will of the American people. I introduced a bill earlier this week to prevent this from ever materializing.
The reason a legislative scheme to pass cap-and-trade has come to light is because its proponents do not have the 60 votes needed in the Senate. This is a sign that the legislation is flawed. Traditionally it would've been reworked until it merits the support of 60 senators. But not anymore.
The plan now is to pass an energy bill in the Senate without a cap-and-trade regime, but add cap-and-trade later, in a House-Senate Conference bill. When that bill comes back to the Senate, in a lame-duck session, some in the majority predict that senators who are no longer facing re-election, due to retirement or a loss, are likely to flip-flop and support it. The political scheming of a lame-duck Senate would triumph over the will of the American people.
This has given cap-and-trade proponents a fresh avenue to pass it without Senate debate. As one senior Democrat said in a recent interview, the post-election environment could let some members feel "free and liberated" to vote a cap-and-trade regime into law.
The obvious question: Free and liberated from what? Should the passage of such a sweeping policy initiative depend on the moment its proponents are least accountable to those who elected them? Are we to understand that the American people are a burden, a handicap, a captor of public officials?
This shocking scheme might be easily dismissed, had it not already been widely reported. Politico wrote that the strategy now is to "conference the new Senate [Energy] bill with the already-passed House bill in a lame-duck session after the election, so House members don't have to take another tough vote ahead of midterms." Energy and Environment Daily reported, according to House majority leadership, the "conference committee may wind up merging the House cap-and-trade plan with a Senate bill that does not include it."
Even President Barack Obama and his press secretary have recently hinted as much. Less than six months after railroading the health care bill through budget reconciliation, the plan again seems to resort to any means necessary to get an equally ill-conceived bill through Congress. The American people do not want – nor deserve – more procedural shenanigans.
I introduced a bill on July 27, to prevent cap-and-trade from being inappropriately added to a bill -- unless the Senate has already debated and approved it. It does not directly address the merits or shortcomings of cap-and-trade; it essentially requires cap-and-trade to pass the Senate before being inserted in a conference report.
If cap-and-trade is added in conference and comes back to the Senate, two-thirds of the Senate would have to agree to vote on it without having debated it. If the Senate approves a cap-and-trade regime under regular order, my amendment wouldn't be triggered. The amendment is waiting for Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to allow it consideration on the Senate floor.
If we're going to pass a bill that will change our economic landscape, it should be good enough to pass on its own merits. Any major policy initiative -- like cap-and-trade -- should be debated in the Senate so the American people have an opportunity to understand its implications and voice their opinions.
This is an issue that transcends partisanship, just as it did when the Senate voted overwhelmingly last year to keep cap-and-trade from passing via budget reconciliation. My bill looks ahead to preserve the legislative process now -- so it is not hijacked later.
If, in four or five months, the Senate is "free and liberated" from public opinion to pass bills that would otherwise be rejected, as one of my colleagues suggested, what does that say about our relationship with the American people? It's no surprise Congress has such low approval ratings.
We should debate the merits of cap-and-trade. If it is going to be voted on, we should be on the record before the election, not after. The idea that we can be "free and liberated" from our constituencies should be eliminated from the Senate's conscience.
Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) serves on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee.
No comments:
Post a Comment