There’s been a lot of hoopla recently about the question of whether or not Barack Obama will go to Copenhagen. He settled that yesterday by saying that he would go if he’s needed to finalize an agreement. This story from Reuters quotes the President: “If I am confident that all of the countries involved are bargaining in good faith and we are on the brink of a meaningful agreement and my presence in Copenhagen will make a difference in tipping us over edge then certainly that’s something that I will do.”
His top White House deputy on climate change and energy, Carol Browner, said in this report from Bloomberg News that “We feel very, very confident that we can work with the rest of the world to take significant steps forward in Copenhagen.” What concerns a lot of folks though – here in the US and in the community of nations, some of which have really been working very hard to effect something truly meaningful at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – is that the US Senate, with only 26 days to go before the meetings in Copenhagen, is stuck in reverse. As I’ve noted a number of times, including here most recently, the House has done its job and the President and his team are working very hard to make things happen, internationally and domestically. The Senate, however, is throwing an awful lot of sand into the machinery.
I’ve opined on how the US Senate may be the least democratic parliamentary body in the democratic world. First, Senators do not each represent an equal number of Americans. Wyoming has as many Senators as California, South Carolina as New York.
Second, the rules work against progress. Two fifths of the body – 40 Senators – can thwart the will of the rest. It’s called a filibuster. This comes from a Dutch word meaning “pirate.” How apt. If you thought the filibuster was an antidemocratic and archaic mechanism, how about the Senatorial “privilege” of a hold! One Senator can stop what 99 others may want. (See the “ugly” part of my post here.) Treaties need two thirds assent for passage. So, a determined minority can block anything that comes out of COP 15. (See, for instance, how the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and the International Criminal Court have been DOA at the Senate’s door.)
Third, the Senate – and the House of Representatives for that matter – are so overwhelmed by heavily bankrolled special interest lobbies that it would be difficult to call much of what comes out of Congress untainted good public policy. No, I’m not naïve. I know what time it is. That’s how the game is played. Nevertheless, the influence of money is so strong that it’s virtually impossible to work through to positive outcomes good for the body politic as a whole – not to mention the planet.
Lobbyists Accused of Blocking Climate Change Efforts reports CBS’s BNET. According to the Center for Public Integrity this is, to be fair, a global problem. Efforts at reducing the world’s GHG emissions “…are being stymied by a far-reaching, multinational backlash led by fossil fuel industries and other heavy carbon emitters…” In America, even in the face of good-faith efforts by powerhouse groups of businesses like the United States Climate Action Partnership and Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy, the fossil fuel folks are spearheading opposition to cap-and-trade.
You may have noted that the seven Republican members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee boycotted last week’s markup of the Kerry-Boxer bill. Committee Chair Barbara Boxer bent over backwards to play ball with them, as Politico reported here. They still refused to get in the game. As Senator Lautenberg said: “Their behavior challenges everything we are about. It’s almost like school children over there.”
Well, Senator, it’s not just the Republicans. Senator Baucus, the only member of the Environment Committee who voted against the bill, is having his own hearings in the Finance Committee that he chairs. “Grist” had this to say: Senate Finance Committee calls on polluter lobbyists to defend pollution economy yet again. Is Baucus trying to completely scuttle climate legislation in the Senate this year?
The “Financial Times” had some more to say on this last week here. They’re writing about “Americans for Prosperity, the rightwing group that inflamed the healthcare debate over the summer and is set to do the same on climate change.” Follow the money though: “AFP is partly funded by the Koch Family Foundations, an offshoot of Koch Industries, the largest privately-owned US energy company, and receives other corporate funding, including from ExxonMobil in the past.”
So with all the organized, special-interest opposition – and tepid response from Democrats, at best, it’s going to continue to be a tough slog. “The Caucus” blog at the “NY Times” has this sober reflection in its succinct and lucid item on the situation: “…prospects for an energy bill capping carbon emissions appear shaky even next year.” [My emphasis.]
I really thought the stars were aligning in American politics for a breakthrough this year. As noted, the President and the House of Representatives have been doing their jobs. The Senate, however, is going to be a much tougher nut than even long-time – and cynical – Hill watchers like me had predicted. We need a progressive version of Lyndon Johnson, Master of the Senate that he was, to crack some heads.
