Enemies of Climate Action Turn Up the Heat

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.

This entry was posted in Climate Change Legislation. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

4 Comments

  1. jpmorgan13
    Posted July 22, 2009 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

    Yes. People are upset. Unfortunately you belief they are just sheeple in flyover America. Get over yourselves and your elitist views. Calling people with legitimate concerns teabaggers is disgraceful.

    Unfortunately, these are real people who will be affected by higher costs for ALL products, not just their energy bills. People will pay more for milk, bread, and other basic necessities. This will hurt the poorest the most. It will also kill jobs.

    All for something there is no proof we can control (climate change). Even if Cap and trade passes there would be an exodus of companies overseas where there are likely to pollute more than they would in America…causing MORE emissions.

  2. Posted July 22, 2009 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

    It's unfortunate that jpmorgan13 believes that supporters of climate action are motivated by "elitist views" and disrespect for "sheeple in flyover country."

    I and those I know are motivated instead by a deep love for their country, their children, and their neighbors. We see the damage global warming has caused around the globe and in our backyards, from Hurricane Katrina to the Iowa floods, and we recognize that oil and coal companies may not actually have our best interests at heart.

    Fortunately, Waxman-Markey is designed to lift up the poorest among us — not just by limiting the ravages of global warming, but also by directing billions of dollars into job training, income support, building insulation, and relief from the crushing weight of their energy bills. As the EPA found, utility bills will go down and net incomes will rise for the poor, with minimal impact on even the very rich.

    How is this possible? Because right now half the energy we produce is wasted. We lose energy on an outdated grid, heating and cooling leaky houses, driving gas guzzlers. There's so much opportunity in reducing pollution that even if we didn't need to tackle global warming for the sake of our children we'd be chumps not to seize this new economy.

  3. armorine
    Posted July 23, 2009 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Additionally, it is unfortunate that jpmorgan13, and others, believe that short-term cost increases won't result in long-term returns. One example would be a plug-in hybrid or an electric car (ex: Ford's all electric 2011 Focus option). While the down payment is more than a standard version, maintenance costs are less, fuel costs are less (probably less than 25 cents per day for an average commute, i.e. $100/year), and the resale value is higher (great at trade-in time).

    And elitist, far from it. I'm a marine biologist with a Masters, which means I make nothing. :-)

  4. Red
    Posted July 29, 2009 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

    CLEAN ENeRGY IS A DIRTY LIE;
    ASK ME WHY,

    Go ahead, ask. The environment is fine, it's the PEOPLE that are all )*&&%^ up.
    Hey armorine, what about all the juice for your batteries and all the heavy metal for batteries, and the higher death rate for smaller vehicles, ad nauseum…….
    S
    And don't get me started on that long legged mac daddy in the white house. He's out to KILL jobs until we all succumb to a nanny state.
    Outstanding in the cornfield,
    beyond biofeedback
    Red

One Trackback

  • About this blog

    Expert to expert commentary on the science, law and economics of climate change.

  • Get blog posts by email

    Subscribe via RSS

  • Meet The Bloggers

    Megan CeronskyMegan Ceronsky
    Attorney

    Nat KeohaneNat Keohane
    Vice President for International Climate

    Ilissa Ocko
    High Meadows Fellow, Office of Chief Scientist

    Peter Zalzal
    Staff Attorney

    Gernot Wagner
    Senior Economist

    Graham McCahan
    Attorney

    Mandy Warner
    Climate & Air Policy Specialist

    Pamela Campos
    Attorney

    Kritee
    High Meadows Scientist

  • Posts by topic

  • Archives