As a young woman, I dated a true malaprop. I knew his feelings for me were true, but if I really paid attention to his words, I would have had serious doubts. He would look deep into my eyes and say, “You cease to amaze me.” And I would reply, “Gee, thanks, honey.”
Well, the Senate has ceased to amaze me, having killed two climate change-related bills in less than one week.
Those of us who live on the East Coast are slowly melting under an oppressive heat wave stretching from New York and Boston to the Carolinas. Here in the Washington DC area, the heat is not just unbearable but downright dangerous: We're literally under a Code Red, or excessive heat advisory.
On the positive side (and trust me, I looked long and hard for a positive side), at least this heat wave serves as a reminder of what we have to look forward to as the "new normal" if we don't do something about climate change --- fast.
This is our first post from Vivian Buckingham, our new Policy Director at 1Sky. -- Luis
“While the Senate fiddles, the globe warms.” That plaintive quip by Joe Lieberman, co-author of the doomed Climate Security Act (S. 3036), was much more ironic and unfortunate than even he could have realized.
The Senate just voted to on motion to end a filibuster of the Lieberman-Warner climate change bill (known as a cloture motion). The motion failed, 48-36, with 16 Senators not voting. Sixty votes were needed to approve the motion. This most likely means that the bill is dead for the remainder of the year. Here's the press release we just issued on the bill's failure.
As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan drag on and America’s image abroad continues to take a beating, it’s clear that foreign policy will once again be front and center during the presidential election. What does this have to do with climate change? As it turns out, quite a lot: Climate change has become one of the most important foreign policy issues the next president will have to tackle.
The long-awaited Lieberman-Warner climate change bill finally hit the Senate floor yesterday afternoon. As you would expect, it has triggered a passionate debate on the blogosphere about its merits—or lack thereof. Here’s a sampling of the blogosphere buzz surrounding the bill:
I went down to the Hill yesterday with three of our brand-new summer interns to check out the Warner-Lieberman press conference. Although the event was billed as a press conference, it definitely felt more like a rally.
While the capture and storage of emissions from coal-fired power plants is sometimes touted as a cost-effective way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, an article published in today's New York Times emphasizes the rising costs and growing uncertainty behind the technology. The front-page article highlights cancellations of high profile carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) projects like FutureGen, and notes that