Draft Senate Global Warming Bill Expected Next Week

U.S. Senator, Barbara Boxer

According to the New York Times Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, is expected to release a draft climate change bill next week. Committee hearings are expected during the week of Oct. 5, with markup seen for the week of Oct. 12.

Democratic leaders in the Senate are still seeking a 60-vote coalition to pass the bill. “We’re not at 60 votes yet,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.). “But there are a lot of potential senators who could be part of that 60.”

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), who is playing a major role with Boxer in drafting the bill, said talks are focusing on carbon market oversight and funding for clean coal technology.


2 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Lewis Grant on September 28, 2009 at 10:21 pm

    The Farm Bureau is certainly right in opposing the cap and trade based on how it will affect agriculture and the economy.
    The Farm Bureau should take it even further though since it sounds like the Farm Bureau is not sufficiently objecting on the false premise of carbon dioxide being the culprit. The evidence is overwhelming that it is not. Carbon dioxide is a very, very, minor player in any global warming. And there has been no global warming in the past about10 years when the carbon dioxide values have been the highest. This year in much of the midwest, including here along the front range of Colorado, temperatures have been undesirably cool. I could go into the whole issue but there isn’t space here. There are so many types of evidence that shows that Carbon dioxide isn’t causing global warming.
    There is also the other issue. The proclaimants point out that nearly everything (most quite silly) is hurt by global warming if it does occur starting with the polar bears and including ocean level increases. There is virtually no acknowledgement of the value that global warming and carbon dioxide in the atmospheric could be. On a global scale warmer climates would extend the growing season in many important areas of the globe and extend the productive areas further to the North, and carbon dioxide is sure something to plants can prosper by (the proponents claim only that the weeds would benefit from this). Lewis Grant, Atmospheic Science Professor Emeritus at Colorado State University.


    • Posted by Shawn Martini on September 30, 2009 at 5:31 pm

      Prof. Grant, thank you for your perspective. I’m sure many of our members would fully agree with your assessment. Also, members should know that CFB policy states that,

      “Because of contradictory scientific evidence, we dispute the claim that human activity significantly contributes to global warming; therefore, we oppose the creation of artificial markets or imposition of mandates or taxes which purport to reduce global warming.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: