The House of Representatives passed a climate change bill with a vote of 219 to 212 on Friday. It is not without its critics, notably Dennis Kucinich, who voted against the bill because he believes that it does not have strong enough targets for climate change, and because the mandated changes are delayed in the bill. He is not the only progressive critic of the bill as evidenced by the fact that the Obama administraion and the House leadership had to work very hard to get the votes to pass the bill.
I think this legislation looks good on paper, and I would rather have a bill than not; however, a few issues are troubling, not the least of which is the substantial role that coal is permitted to play as an energy source without the large coal companies being forced to limit the amount of greenhouse gasses (as well as toxins) they are allowed to emit. Rick Boucher saw to it that there were concessions to the coal industry, but I wish it were not he (recipient of large campaign contributions from the coal industry) who pushed so hard to compromise in favor of coal. I wish he were asking the coal industry to sacrifice some of their profits to protect the climate instead of using scare tactics about job loss if they are asked to make changes. Reference this Boucher quote published by Rawstory:
| |
Last month, Boucher announced on his website, “I am pleased to report that following six weeks of continuous and intensive negotiations with Chairman Waxman and Chairman Markey, I have now reached an agreement with them on the principles for greenhouse gas control legislation. … I have been working with Chairmen Waxman and Markey to advance the goals which I think are important to achieve in control legislation. These goals are the preservation of coal related jobs, the facilitation of growing coal production, and keeping electricity rates affordable in regions like Southwest Virginia where most of the electricity is coal fired.”
|
Boucher's words sound reasonable, but are they factual? Must there be concessions to coal to preserve jobs and keep electricity costs low? And, even if electricity costs are kept artificially low, is that the issue that he and the coal companies and we consumers should be most concerned with when the planet may be in peril from greenhouse gases that are contributing a great deal to climate change? In May, the program at the Democracy Prevails meeting was about the mountain-top removal system of extracting coal.
Jason Johnson and Matt Hepner (above), who have experience as a community organizer and environmental engineer respectively and belong to iLovMountains.org, (a consortium of organizations that work to end mountaintop removal and create a prosperous future for the region,) led a discussion about the economic and environmental troubles caused by this type of mining that is now the preferred method of extracting coal by large coal companies.
The issue of producing energy in ways that do not contribute to warming the globe is not intractable, but at times it seems so because, as stated above, it is easier and less expensive for many big coal companies to simply fear monger about miners losing their jobs when the facts are that mountain-top removal has resulted in a decrease in jobs while accidents have remained as high as traditional underground mining and toxins and pollutions have increased dramatically. Up front, electricity rates might be lower, but we, as consumers, pay just as much or more in the increased cost of medical care. We all pay indirectly for people who get sick. Insurance companies pay health-care charges by spreading the risk to everyone, so all the premium holders are paying more for their health insurance.
Obama has shown leadership in trying to pass a climate change bill to make the country less energy dependent on foreign powers while, at the same time, working toward a cleaner environment and stablizing climate change. In my opinion, he needs more help from Congress whose members should
- quit engaging in sophistry about global warming
- stop pandering to and protecting energy companies who contribute generously to their campaigns
- demand accountability from coal companies who break or skirt the laws that are supposed to protect coal communities from an unhealthy environment and to operate in ways that continue to facilitate the negative effects of global warming.