Last week, the governors of three states from vastly different parts of the country — New Jersey, Colorado, and Washington — traveled to Washington, D.C., to show their support for the climate bill.

They appeared before the Senate to report that "efforts to curb global warming and spur the development of cleaner sources of energy have created jobs and new businesses in their states, a trend that could expand nationwide if Congress passes federal legislation."

The governors are the newest addition to the climate bill fan club.  Small business owners, electric company CEOs, environmentalists and a majority of the House of Representatives already back climate legislation.

Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, Jr., talked about the revitalization of an old steel town in his state. He explained the lesson "good energy policy and climate policy can energize the economy and help create good-paying private sector jobs."

More on the hearing.

The radical right is organizing an all-out, take-no-prisoners campaign to block President Obama's efforts to reform America's energy policies and stop global warming. Led by Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin, right wing ideologues are lining up with big polluters to defeat climate action this year.

Joe Romm talks about their "passionate intensity" in a blog post today. His key points:

[T]he entire conservative messaging apparatus is full-throated in its opposition to this bill — and they have well-heeled funders, aka the dirty-energy bunch. [...]

But we should be equaling, if not beating, calls to key senators right now. [...]

Reason enough for passage of a bill with emissions targets like Waxman-Markey (preferably stronger) is to give the international climate negotiations in Copenhagen (and beyond) a fighting chance — and not to strangle a global deal in the crib as the deniers and polluters hope to do with their immoral and ultimately self-destructive filibuster.

And to prove his point, this just in from Twitter: The opposition is being extremely vocal towards Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska:

kate_sheppard RT @Populista: Ben Nelson says letters in Nebraska are running 99-1 against #ACES. Says people at parades are shouting "No cap and trade"

You can help fight back by calling your Senators today.

And if Sen. Nelson is your Senator, here are various ways to let him know you support climate action.

The Web and the Twitterverse are awash with nonsense about the clean energy bill that passed the House in late June.

The bill's opponents are trying to scare homeowners by making them believe an energy audit or retrofit is required before they could sell their homes.  That's nuts — the bill does nothing of the kind.  Here's what it actually does:

• For existing homes, the bill creates incentives to encourage people to do retrofits of their homes. It doesn't require anything.
• For new homes, the bill establishes federal guidelines for energy-efficiency labeling. It's up to local governments whether they want to have new homes in their area labeled or not.

See more details in our fact sheet on home energy in the climate bill.

The latest Smithsonian magazine has an in-depth piece that tells the story of "How an unlikely mix of environmentalists and free-market conservatives hammered out the strategy known as cap-and-trade."

The story is powerful — it starts with a hike,  leads to fury within the Bush White House and ends with results:

Almost 20 years since the signing of the Clean Air Act of 1990, the cap-and-trade system continues to let polluters figure out the least expensive way to reduce their acid rain emissions. As a result, the law costs utilities just $3 billion annually, not $25 billion, according to a recent study in the Journal of Environmental Management; by cutting acid rain in half, it also generates an estimated $122 billion a year in benefits from avoided death and illness, healthier lakes and forests, and improved visibility on the Eastern Seaboard. (Better relations with Canada? Priceless.)

…

Cap-and-trade — a term that first appeared in print that year — quickly went "from being a pariah among policy makers," as an MIT analysis put it, "to being a star — everybody's favorite way to deal with pollution problems."

You have to give Sarah Palin credit for getting attention — her op-ed in the Washington Post on climate change legislation triggered an avalanche of blog posts and opinion columns. Here's a round-up:

The facts, please!

• Sen. John Kerry is among the many to point out that Palin completely ignored the looming specter of climate change. Others included Treehugger, Politics Daily and The Atlantic's Derek Thompson.
• Bill Chameides, formerly EDF's chief scientist and now the head of Duke University's school of the environment, adds that Alaska has a lot of hurt coming its way if we don't act.
• On Daily Kos, wah's take-down starts with a good summary of how we got here.
• PolitiFact focuses on her claims about job losses.
• In other comprehensive fact checks, Media Matters gives a rundown of her false statements, and Russ Walker debunks Palin's points using nothing but recycled Grist posts.
• If you want your fact-checking laced with outrage, check out Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic, who writes that her ignorance is "so profound it's almost gutsy." And Think Progress unearths a video clip in which she seems to take the opposite view.

Why is she doing this?

• Josh at Talking Points Memo thinks it's all about rebranding Palin as a policy wonk. So does the Political Animal at Washington Monthly (who also notes that her running mate long supported cap and trade).
• Jean Williams of the Seattle Examiner thinks Palin wants to pave the way to drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge.
• Treehugger thinks that either she doesn't understand the bill or she wanted to talk up her natural gas pipeline.

Really, everyone is piling on!

It wasn't just the usual environmental crowd who were taken aback by Palin's claims. People taking issue with her stance popped up in unexpected places:

• Alaska Dispatch's Palin Watch says "Palin is wrong on cap and trade."
• A Kansas City Star columnist lists a few things she scored on, but a lot more misses.
• The Christian Science Monitor also says Palin missed the mark with her cap-and-trade critique

Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee yesterday, and gave an impassioned plea to include a strong, credible agricultural offsets program in Senate climate legislation:

Environmental Defense Fund believes that an effective climate solution must include US agricultural offsets. American farmers, foresters, and landowners can provide creditable emissions reductions while earning a new income stream, and we must give them that opportunity.

Fred outlined ways to create credible offsets program that would benefit the entire country – including farmers and taxpayers. He stressed that any program must be science-based and must provide real, measurable, verifiable benefits to the atmosphere.

The highlight of the hearing was a spirited exchange between Fred and Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) about gas prices. (In the video of the hearing released by the committee, advance to 89:40 to see the back-and-forth.)

Of course, Fred also heaped praise on the House for passing the American Clean Energy and Security Bill, even as he told Senators they could strengthen that critical legislation even more by improving the offsets provisions.

Here's a link to Fred's full written testimony [PDF].

Michael Oppenheimer and I have a post up on Huffington Post that explains why cap and trade is more effective than a tax at slowing and eventually halting global warming.

Here are just the highlights:

1. Environmental certainty. Let's keep our eyes on the prize: avoiding dangerous climate change. A legally binding cap is the only way to assure that this objective will actually be attained.
2. International opportunity. The atmosphere is indifferent to where carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, is emitted. The ultimate goal, once countries like China and Brazil have adequate systems for monitoring their emissions, is a global carbon market — benefiting both the developing countries and the industrialized countries.
3. The market, not the government, sets the price. Cap and trade is a smart division of labor: Congress sets the cap, and the market sets the price on carbon needed to achieve it.
4. Political viability. In our view, cap and trade is the best policy on the merits. But it is also the politically viable path. A recent survey shows that of all regulatory approaches, the public likes taxes least.

Each of these reasons are explained in more detail on Huffington Post. Take a look and add to the comments!

The Dittohead and Tea Bagger crowd are piling on in opposition to Congressional action to address global warming.

Taking cues from daily tirades from Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin and the gang, the radical right has been organizing an intensive phone-banking operation targeting members of Congress.

According to Grist.org, callers are even being instructed to use phony home addresses and to call member offices multiple times to manufacture the impression that constituents are against climate action.

These underhanded efforts have skewed results so much that some offices are reporting a 100:1 ratio of calls against climate action.

Check out the Grist story.

What you can do:

First, call your real members of Congress to express support for global warming action. The Capitol Hill switchboard is (202) 224-3121.

Second, spread the word online. Email this story to your friends and family. Post this on Facebook and/or on Twitter. Let everyone know that the radical right is manufacturing false opposition to climate action and that we need to fight back.

Finally, engage in the debate online and off. When you see a story about climate action online, be sure to share your views by commenting on the story. If possible, send letters to the editor of your local paper. Help make sure your community knows that it's critical we act. We can solve the climate crisis in a way that is affordable and that will create jobs and free America from our dependence on foreign oil.

Thanks for all you do.