As climate legislation in 2009 seems more and more possible (presuming we make it so), the climate bill is coming under increasing fire from the right. Meanwhile, the climate community is getting better and better at linking the economy to a cap on carbon - that's the name of the game with congressional swing votes right now.

The House Climate Bill

Reps. Markey and Waxman will release their discussion draft next week (presumably mid-week) What we know, or are inferring, about the bill:

• It will include cap and trade, with most allowances auctioned;
  
  
• The allocations (i.e., where the money goes) probably won't be completely fleshed out;
  
  
• Generally, it will be strong, but will likely fall short of global expectations heading into Copenhagen, particularly vis-a-vis emissions reductions targets near term;
  
  
• It will include a 25% by 2025 Renewable Energy Standard (RES). See this release from the Union of Concerned Scientists for a preview;
  
  
• An Energy Efficiency Resource Standard (EERS) -- kind of like cap and trade, but for energy savings.

We'll send out more info and analysis as soon as we have it.

Swings votes on the House Energy and Commerce Committee will continue to dictate how strong this bill is. Here's an example of some solid activity in a swing district -- this is a YouTube video made to target Rep. Butterfield (D-NC1), featuring an early 1Sky collaborator Majora Carter:

The climate community's reactions to this bill will likely be mixed, but generally supportive. It's best for Reps Markey and Waxman to have support from all of us, but some critique as well. If the bill doesn't rise our expectations, this is an opportunity to stake out our ground, make Committee leadership look moderate, and provide cover for on-committee champs to speak out for a stronger bill.

Other House Climate Bills

Two carbon tax bills have already been introduced in the House and referred to the Ways and Means Committee. HR 1337, sponsored by Rep. John Larson, and HR 594, sponsored by Rep. Fortney Stark, which is somewhat weaker. Reps Larson (D-CT), Stark (D-CA), McDermott (D-WA), Inglis (R-SC) Doggett (D-TX), and Van Hollen (D-MA) have written or are planning on writing other climate bills, some of which may be dropped in the next couple weeks. These bills (all carbon tax or cap and trade bills) could add something useful to the climate discussion: strong targets, consistent carbon prices, innovative consumer protection provisions etc. Also of interest is Rep Blumenauer's Clean TEA bill that allocates 10% of the auction revenue of a presumed cap and trade bill for innovative transportation initiatives.

Our take is that the most productive way forward will be to play off what comes out of Chairman Waxman's committee over the next two months, given the champions involved, i.e. Waxman’s power as Chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee and Markey’s role as Chair of the related Subcommittee.

Now, a note on cap and trade/dividend vs. carbon tax:

This unfortunate division in policy preferences continues to emerge as a stumbling block for uniting the progressives -- especially in the House Ways & Means Committee. We think that each can be done well, and each can be done poorly. The mechanism is not as important as the result -- it's our role to push for the best result we can get. With cap and trade actually moving now led by advocates most closely connected to the White House, tax advocates might run the risk of being seen as irrelevant. We need all of our firepower focused on making this bill better. Regardless of which label we slap on this, we have to be supportive of strong legislation that will reduce emissions dramatically: cap and invest, a price on carbon, a carbon cap, a market-based cap on carbon, climate legislation, global warming legislation, etc.

Here's what lies ahead:

• 3/30-4/3: Markey-Waxman Discussion Draft;
  
  
• May: Markey-Waxman Subcommittee Markup;
  
  
• Promised by 5/22: Markey-Waxman Full Committee Markup;
  
  
• June-July: floor time for Markey-Waxman bill, presumably followed by a full House vote.

Climate in the Senate

Sen. Boxer (D-CA) - chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) has still not committed to a timeframe:

"It hasn't been decided," Boxer said. "It's a very fluid strategy. I could decide tomorrow to mark up next week. It depends on a lot of other factors."

Our take is that the Senate is trying to build momentum via energy bill pieces, and will be more decisive after they observe how legislation plays out in the House in the coming months. Majority Leader Reid (D-NV) committed to a one-bill climate and energy bill strategy weeks ago, but is already butting heads with Sen. Bingaman (D-NM Chair of Energy and Natural resources, ENR) over transmission policy. Rumor has it Reid will clarify his game plan in the coming week. Reid introduced a transmission bill that was countered by a much different draft from Sen Bingaman. Here's more on the mega-bill climate/energy joint choreography.

In terms of Senate timing, last week Reid mentioned that he wanted a floor debate before the August recess. Unlike the House, Boxer does not feel obligated to take a complimentary climate bill through "regular order" (i.e. lengthy committee review). She says she could have a bill out of her Committee in a week. Given these recent comments, and the general House timing. We could conceivably see bicameral floor debates this June and July (but nothing is certain in the Senate this year).

Clean Energy Corps

In other news, the Clean Energy Service Corps established via the GIVE Act passes in the House (GIVE: Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education). The vote count: 221 Ayes, 191 Nays, 19 Abstains. This is a solid step toward the comprehensive vision laid out in the Clean Energy Corps.

Obama's Budget Update

Weeks ago, Obama proposed a budget to Congress that included auction revenue raised from placing a price (i.e. a cap) on carbon emissions. With Obama's climate agenda now tied to the budget, many climate and energy advocates have started to rally behind the Budget proposal, framing this as a must-win prerequisite for a climate bill.

A "budget reconciliation" is one option discussed by the media for passing climate and health care policies. Reconciliation refers to budget provisions that can pass through the Senate with just 50 votes (10 less than the usual 60 needed to block a filibuster). Opposition is lining up against this approach, saying a cap requires a full discussion. Sens. Boxer and Reid want to keep this option on the table, but 22 Senators are against it, including Budget Committee Chair Kent Conrad (D-ND), and fairly progressive Sen. Rob Casey (D-PA). About 50 Blue Dog Democrats in the House are also against reconciliation.

Obama's budget proposal is a 10-year plan that includes revenues from a cap on carbon. If the resolution includes the implied revenues from a cap on carbon, that would not indicate support for climate legislation, per se -- especially because the budget is so large. But having the revenues excised would be a public defeat that would not bode well for climate legislation. All eight Republicans on Senate EPW (Environment and Public Works Committee) recently spoke out against including climate in the resolution, and are trying to recruit more colleagues for the motion.