2009
I am posting this at the request of MoveOn.org. I hope everyone will sign the petition.
It’s 2009. Democrats have ample majorities in both houses of Congress. President Obama campaigned on the promise to tackle climate change and boost our economy by investing in clean energy.So why on earth is Congress considering an energy bill that:
* Would weaken current law, repealing President Obama’s authority to crack down on dirty power plants,1 and
* Doesn’t actually require the creation of new solar or wind power? (The Union of Concerned Scientists has concluded that the clean energy standards won’t make power companies produce more clean energy than is already in the works.)2Why? Because Big Oil and Coal have teamed up with conservatives in both parties, and they’ve been successful in weakening the bill.
These are major flaws, but the bill has a lot of really good provisions, too. The key thing is that Congress can still strengthen it—if there’s a public outcry. But we don’t have much time: Congress is expected to vote on this bill in less than three weeks.Can you sign this petition to Representative Mark Souder today? Eighty thousand MoveOn members have already signed. We need to double the number of signatures by Wednesday—that means we need 34 more signatures in Fort Wayne. MoveOn members will personally deliver this petition to many congressional offices the next day. Click here to add your name:
The petition says: “We need a stronger energy bill to fulfill Obama’s vision of a clean energy economy. Congress should strengthen the clean energy standards and restore Obama’s authority to crack down on dirty coal plants.”
Congress must change the energy bill to require power companies to produce more clean energy for America. Wind and solar create more than twice as many jobs as coal and oil.3 And Congress needs to hold polluters accountable by restoring President Obama’s current authority through the EPA to crack down on global warming pollution from power plants.
The Union of Concerned Scientists analysis finds that the current version of the clean energy standard “won’t require utilities to use any more renewable electricity than…would be generated as a result of state renewable electricity standards already in place and the recently enacted stimulus package.”4
If we just sit back, we’ll miss our chance to go big with wind and solar—and we’ll lose the jobs those industries would create. Big Oil and Coal will keep getting billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies. And President Obama will be powerless to stop more than 100 new dirty coal plants, which will crowd out the clean energy growth we need to boost our economy.5
There are some good parts of the bill, but these are significant problems. As the Sierra Club’s Carl Pope writes, the bill establishes strong long-term goals for cutting carbon pollution and very strong energy-efficiency investments, “but in its present form, it won’t do all that’s needed. The oil, coal, and dirty-utility interests…were able to prevent enactment of President Obama’s much bolder vision…Yes, they will try to kill the green-jobs recovery in its cradle, and yes, they will try to block our clean-energy future.”6
Please urge Rep. Souder to fight for a stronger energy bill. Clicking here will add your name to the petition:
http://pol.moveon.org/cleanenergy/o.pl?id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=5
Thanks for all you do.
–Anna, Michael, Joan, Noah and the rest of the team
Sources:
1. “Bill Needs Strengthening to Guarantee Necessary Carbon Reductions, New Green Jobs and Consumer Benefits, Science Group Says,” Union of Concerned Scientists, May 14, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51475&id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=62. “EPA urged to act on climate, not wait for Congress,” Associated Press, May 18, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51479&id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=7“American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009,” Library of Congress, May 15, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51482&id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=83. “Green Recovery: A Program to Create Good Jobs and Start Building a Low-Carbon Economy,” Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, September 2008
http://www.peri.umass.edu/green_recovery/4. “Bill Needs Strengthening to Guarantee Necessary Carbon Reductions, New Green Jobs and Consumer Benefits, Science Group Says,” Union of Concerned Scientists, May 14, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51475&id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=95. “Stopping the Coal Rush,” Sierra Club
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51483&id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=106. “So How Good Is This Climate Bill, Anyhow?” Sierra Club, May 22, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51478&id=16315-6770804-h.O2CKx&t=11
Signed! We need to do as much as possible to treat the Earth as a friend, rather than a foe!
Thank you, Talgrimm! I'm with you there!
Hrafnkell,
I signed the petition.
As regards Obama's foreign policy I have been worried lately.
To undo the damage that the Bush administration had done, Obama maybe going a bit too far and adopting a downright posture of servitude and bending backwards all the way in appeasing the rich oil lords of west Asia.
I was surprised to hear Obama's speech in which he said that the values of the US were on par with the values of Islam; both stood for ""tolerance, justice and brotherhood"" (sic!)
I understand that Obama was being extremely politically correct when he said that, but I still can't help wincing from the thought that he actually made that statement.
Islam doesn't preach tolerance, justice and brotherhood. It preaches violence against the infidel much as Judaism and Christianity do and justice and brotherhood are only offered to the followeres of Islam and not to other monotheists or to pagans. So how does the question of Islam being at par with the values of tolerance, justice and brotherhood enshrined in the US constitution, arise?
The American constitution has been modelled on the democratic principles of ancient Greece.
The Pentagon recently released a report in which it said that investigations had revealed that the Bush administartion had known Pakistan was using US aid for building up its weapon systems for
using against India and the Bush administartion had done nothing to stop this.
Now, inspite of the fact that the Obama administration is in knowledge of the above fact, it had pledged an aid package of $200 million to Pakistan.
I am afraid that India may be revisited by the era of Strobe Talbott. He was the Democrat envoy under President Bill Clinton, who had turned a blind eye to Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme, at the same time berating India for making herself nuclear capable.
I wish President Obama would act responsibly and practically and only be polite with the muslim world as much as it is required, without appearing servile.
What he has already done is slavish and not practical in the least. As far as South Asia is concerned the Obama administration's steps are akin to doublespeak. It wants to keep both India and Pakistan as allies and has conveniently forgotten that the Islamic bomb and the threats of Osama still loom large.
I am not 100% satisfied with Obama's policies either. Few will be, I suppose, except perhaps a few fanatics. I'm particularly upset about the reversal of his earlier position against the "don't ask, don't tell" policy the military has towards gay-lesbian soldiers. I'm also unhappy about his reversal on issues of secrecy and a few other things – these in addition to some of his foreign policy decisions.
At the same time, I'm glad he's not bending over backwards to please Israel. The policy under Bush was not simply "America Right or Wrong" but "Israel Right or Wrong" too. People can't hold that sort of loyalty to two countries and I don't even think it's healthy to hold it towards one's own. We have a right and a responsibility to be critical of our governments.