By Julianne LaJeunesse, University of New Mexico-Talk Radio News Service

With only three weeks until the United Nations’ Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, experts say that an unready United States will have to show the international community that it is still committed to long-term solutions.

“On this front, the U.S. is a bit tardy in terms of delivering its commitments but it hasn’t quite got an incomplete yet,” said Jack Schmidt, International Climate Policy Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, who spoke Monday on a conference call with reporters.

President Barack Obama said that time for negotiations has run out for the U.S. in terms of forging agreements at the Summit. Obama said he favors a Danish proposal, which outlines commitments while postponing deadlines on emission targets, financing and technology transfer. In Singapore yesterday, Obama said he remains committed to reducing U.S. emissions by 80% and endorsed a goal of reducing global emissions by 50% by 2050.

Schmidt said that “prompt-start financing” could reflect U.S. resolve. The financial commitment builds trust between developed and undeveloped countries by providing the means to invest in infrastructure for undeveloped countries that want to use clean energy technology in product and energy creation.

“We need to stay focused on the fact that a number of the key countries across the world, including the major developed countries, over the past year… have brought forward commitments and have signaled that they’re going to take steps,” Schmidt said.

Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) stated Friday that he is frustrated by the pace at which climate policy is developing in the U.S.

“It’s fairly clear at this point that we’re not going to be in a position to make a significant, new legislative achievement between now and the time of the Copenhagen meeting,” said Daschle during a telephone briefing with reporters, referencing December’s United Nation’s climate change conference.

“Time is wasting, work needs to be done,” he added.

Daschle acknowledged that health care reform has monopolized a great deal of Congress’ time, but expressed hope that after work on the issue is completed, legislators will give greater focus to climate change legislation.

“As we go forward, this will become more and more central,” said Daschle. “The House has acted, and there’s every expectation the Senate will as well.”

The American Clean Energy and Security Act passed through the House in June. The Senate moved the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, sponsored by Senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer, through the Environment and Public Works Committee in early November.

U.S. Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) says the United States has two options when it comes to climate change: Voluntarily pass climate protection legislation now, or face federal regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency later. (0:27)

 

 Standard Podcast [0:27m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

David Doniger, former EPA climate change director under President Bill Clinton, says Americans are at a consensus on climate change. Doniger says that is why legislation such as the Waxman-Markey and Kerry-Boxer bills are currently on the table.
:32

 

 Standard Podcast [0:32m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Barbara Finamore of the Natural Resources Defense Council says the United States is in a great position, if ready, to take advantage of China’s new green technology market.
:13

 

 Standard Podcast [0:13m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Julianne LaJeunesse – University of New Mexico

The Economic Policy Institute held a briefing Thursday with Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), environmentalists, and members of industries that would experience financial and physical changes under proposed climate change bills like the House-passed Waxman-Markey bill and the Kerry-Boxer “Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act.”

During the briefing, Robert Scott of EPI talked about his recent report “Climate Change Policy—Border Adjustment Key to U.S. Trade and Manufacturing Jobs.” He found an audience in Brown and Leo Gerard, President of the United Steelworkers, when he suggested that U.S. jobs and a competitive U.S. industry presence can be recognized through stronger bill language on “border adjustments” as found in the Waxman-Markey bill.

Border adjustments are fees that are charged to countries who use an unregulated amount of carbon to create exported products. That charge is used as a way to level the playing field for countries whose emissions are regulated.

Brown said he appreciated Waxman-Markey’s included adjustments, but said the allowed level of presidential discretion in the bill is questionable.

“This needs to be done in a way that is automatic… not allows a president, whoever the president is in the years ahead, to have discretion on this,” Brown said. “Because we know how presidents don’t move very aggressively on protecting our national interests on manufacturing and trade.”

Gerard agreed, saying the amount of presidential authority afforded in the Waxman-Markey needs to be brought back to Congress.

“We’ve had a terrible experience with presidential discretion for eight years with President Bush,” Gerard said. “He exercised his discretion and it cost America tens of thousands of jobs.”

In his report, Scott said that if Congress does not support legislation that maintains and improves U.S. competition for energy-intensive and trade-intensive manufacturing, the country could lose as many as 4 million jobs to countries like China and Asia.

Opponents of increasing government control of carbon emissions say that the United States isn’t financially ready to divert its money toward greener jobs, particularly in energy-intensive industries such as steel, pulp and paper, glass and clay and nonmetallic mineral products.

According to the Americans for Tax Reform website, their reason for opposing the Waxman-Markey bill in particular, are because the bill “raises taxes on American families, increases the cost of energy, and eliminates American jobs.”

United Steelworkers President Lou Gerard says that many Americans don’t realize that trade isn’t free. He says changing U.S. legislation to include “border adjustments” which tax environmentally unfriendly countries, could make U.S. trade more favorable.

:27

 

 Standard Podcast [0:27m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Carl Pope of the Sierra Club says that the world can benefit from shared environmentally-friendly technology and trade practices.

1:00

 

 Standard Podcast [1:00m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D- Ohio) says the Waxman-Markey bill is a good starting ground, but the level of presidential discretion in the bill needs more work.

:26

 

 Standard Podcast [0:26m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

By Leah Valencia
, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said the American Clean Air and Security Act will not make it through the Senate if harmful economic consequences facing the manufacturing industry are not addressed.

“I don’t think there’s any way we get to even 50 votes if we don’t deal with manufacturing in the climate change bill,” Brown told reporters in a conference call organized by Campaign for America’s Future. “I do know for sure that there are a number of us who understand that manufacturing is so important to this country that if we don’t do manufacturing right, our standard of living will continue to decline.”

The American Clean Air And Security Act passed through the House of Representatives late June under the stewardship of Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). The bill seeks to put a cap on greenhouse emissions and levy a tax on carbon.

According to Brown, the concern facing lawmakers is that new climate control legislation would constrict existing environmental regulations, and thus persuade manufacturers to advance overseas production as a means to lower labor and energy costs.

Brown said it is imperative to have at least a temporary “border equalization” step to prevent American manufacturing jobs from relocating to India and China

“We need some sort of border equalization … temporary not permanent…until the Chinese and others move in the direction they need to on this issue,” Brown said.

The Ohio senator said the President needs to take a more aggressive approach to regain trust from the American public during this week’s G-20 summit in Pittsburgh.

“The public has already lost confidence in trade agreements and the way we approach globalization,” Brown said.