After six and a half hours of debate Friday afternoon, the house passed the American Clean Energy & Security Act, the broadest piece of climate legislation ever considered by congress. The measure, in short, would set up a cap and trade system to regulate carbon, aiming to cut emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and 80 percent by the end of the century. Republicans broadly opposed the measure for the inevitable rise in taxes and energy prices that providers would pass along to consumers. But Democrats argued it would create new industry and jobs, allowing American energy innovation to lead the rest of the world. (Under the bill, electric companies would have to pull at least six percent of energy from renewable sources within three years).
Nearing the end of the afternoon's debate, minority leader John Boehner took to the floor for his allotted two and a half minutes to speak. He extended his remarks over an hour in the style of a filibuster, usually a senate procedure. Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman, one of the bill's sponsors, accused Boehner of just that -- stalling the vote in hopes that some Democrats would leave the chamber for the Independence Day holiday next week before the vote was called. Democrats cheered. The substitute speaker informed Waxman that Boehner, being a member of the leadership, could speak as long as he wanted. Republicans cheered louder. The final vote was as thin as votes usually get in the house: 219 to 212.
The bill in it's current form faces an uphill battle in the senate, where it heads next. A majority of the senate is expected to rally behind the effort to combat climate change, but this bill might not be what a majority can agree on. "There are concerns in the senate over the complexity of the house bill and of the overall cost," says Paul Bledsoe, lead spokesman for the National Commission on Energy Policy. The basic cap and trade architecture will be similar in whatever the senate devises, but energy analysts familiar with senate negotiations say that the senate's rigid numbers (Democrats can't afford to lose any of their 60 votes without some Republican support) will require certain changes. Specifics, like an precise estimate of what an emissions cap would cost, will be needed to firm up the bill. One Hill staffer reports that senate leaders have already begun working -- even before the house passed its version -- to more specifically answer the question implicit in the framework of the legislation: how exactly will an energy regulation system make the U.S. safer and more competitive internationally?
