Bill would create way to cut greenhouse gases

The “cap and trade” bill written by Democrats would establish a national system to reduce greenhouse gases by 17 percent over the next 11 years, and by 83 percent by 2050.

It would set a market where factories, oil refineries and power plants could buy, sell and trade credits that would allow them to emit only so much carbon dioxide and other pollutants. The permissible amounts would be lowered over time.

Supporters said Congress must take action to solve global warming caused by a reliance on fossil fuels they say is sure to presage environmental disaster.

The 1,200-page bill also requires the broader use of renewable power, sets new standards for energy efficiency in homes and appliances, spurs development of electric vehicles and expands systems for transporting electricity.

President Barack Obama urged Congress to pass the legislation as a pathway to a “clean energy” economy that would create millions of jobs in green technologies that generate electricity and produce new vehicle fuels.

Critics said the impact could be highly disruptive.

All but eight Republicans voted against the bill, saying it amounted to an energy tax that would hit all Americans. They were joined by 44 Democrats, including some who said they feared it would have a disproportionate impact in states reliant on coal for electricity.

Critics argued it could kill jobs in traditional industries, and put the United States at a competitive disadvantage if companies move factories to China, India and other nations that are not moving as aggressively to address climate change.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated it would cost an average family $175 a year. The Environmental Protection Agency set costs at between $80 and $110 a year.

The bill passed, 219-212 after Democratic leaders agreed to a compromise that provided protections for agriculture as a way to attract wavering farm state lawmakers.

Reps. Shelley Berkley and Dina Titus, both D-Nev., voted for the bill. Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., voted against it.

Before passage, the House voted down a Republican alternative, 172-256.

The GOP plan rejected a cap-and-trade approach in favor of a competition to bring together “the best and brightest scientists” who would race to improve techniques aimed at achieving U.S. energy independence within 20 years.

Republicans compared their drive to the Manhattan Project that pushed to build the atomic bomb during World War II.

Goals would include doubling automobile fuel efficiency while keeping cars affordable; cutting home and business energy use in half; and making solar power and biofuels competitive in price to fossil fuels.

Berkley, Titus and Heller voted against the Republican alternative.

TOURISM BILL GETS SHELVED

In the Senate, Democratic leaders shelved a tourism promotion bill after they and Republicans could not come to an agreement over what amendments would be debated.

Although the bill had support within both parties, it failed a procedural vote, 53-34, in which 60 votes were needed to keep it alive.

Senators were pressing to add riders to the bill, which was seen as the last one likely to pass before their Fourth of July recess.

Republicans wanted to propose five amendments dealing with the auto company bailouts, while Democrats had three, including one to limit oil price speculation.

After negotiations failed, eight Republicans who had cosponsored the tourism bill voted against it, while two GOP co-sponsors voted for it. Additionally, seven Democrats who were expected to vote for the bill were not present.

“This Congress cannot even agree on tourism, for God’s sake. Unbelievable to me,” said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., the bill’s sponsor.

The tourism bill would create a nonprofit corporation to sponsor advertising campaigns overseas promoting travel within the United States. The campaigns would be paid by the tourism industry and matched by the government up to $100 million a year.

The government share would come from a new $10 fee on foreign travelers.

Dorgan said the bill aimed to stem a decline in tourism from overseas.

Though the number of international travelers has grown 40 percent since 2000, the United States is down 3 percent in the number of visitors, he said.

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., voted for the tourism bill. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the majority leader, also supported the tourism bill. But he voted against it through a procedure that will allow him to bring it back up for further debate in the future.

Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Steve Tetreault at stetreault @reviewjournal.com or 202-783-1760.