Greens: Kerry-Boxer “Not a Serious Proposal”


This story in E&EM News PM — “Murkowski floats plan to force Senate vote on cap and trade next week” — is spectacular.

The money lines:

“‘Boxer-Kerry is a non-starter, and the amendment — if that’s what it said — it would expose that,’ said Murkowski spokesman Robert Dillon. ‘We obviously don’t want to pass the bill; we’re confident that it would fail.’ Holding a vote on the Kerry-Boxer bill would ’show the sense of the Senate, where it is,’ Dillon said….

’What she’s trying to do is force Democrats to vote against a bill that is clearly one that is not ripe to be brought to the Senate floor,’ said Daniel Weiss, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, noting that the bill was intended to be combined with an energy bill aimed at lowering energy costs and spurring investments in technology.

’This is Lisa Murkowski giving the finger to those who believe we need to reduce global warming pollution because this is not a serious proposal,’ Weiss said.”

Well, that’s not quite what it is, but it does reveal that someone was giving the rest of us the finger all along. And I am more than a little amused to note how the “us” includes not a few fellow travelers in Copenhagen.

Team Soros’s Dan Weiss is now calling the marked-up, EPW-approved Kerry-Boxer bill — rushed through to impress the Europeans with the Dems’ seriousness of purpose and courageous stance on the precipice of bicameral enactment — “not a serious proposal.” Of course, when cheerleading for Kyopenhagen, Weiss touted the bill, inter alia, as “another signal to the international community that the U.S. is serious about achievement of real reductions in its global warming pollution.”

Gosh, that’s great stuff.

Seriously. Nice that you finally admit it, even if it is only when it looks like the bill might be something your pals could have held against them in a meaningful way. There’s nothing like the prospect of a hanging to focus one’s thinking. Or, maybe, it may simply be that it’s rather easier to strike a silly pose for some Euro-love (still an epic fail, incidentally) than it is to confront one’s own constituents.

“What poseurs!” Weiss now admits — about a bill reported to the floor, publicly (and we now know, dishonestly) hailed by him and his ilk. Nothing added by other committees would have been able to unring the bell of cap-and-trade — the objective of which our president has admitted is to cause your energy prices to “necessarily skyrocket” and to “bankrupt” coal and dependent industries. So they’re reduced to saying that it’s painful but, you see, we were planning on adding some windmill “green jobs” and pixie dust nonsense to suddenly take away the pain (or at least distract from what we’re really doing).

Second, recall — and prepare to recount frequently — the promiscuous use of the line “hey, we really don’t want to leave it to EPA to regulate carbon emissions!” as their best argument for “we must act now!” legislatively. That is, legislation designed to instruct the regulators. Designed by the likes of Boxer . . . and Team Soros . . . in the form of Kerry-Boxer.

This does provide a nice hard place against which the act-now folks can be pressed: Perhaps they might be now forced to say “but I don’t want Congress to regulate carbon emissions either!” (or “I do want that, but not via the bill marked up in and voted out of committee and sold to the Europeans and the U.N. as being really great shakes and soon to be enacted.”)

Great stuff. Really. And yet another wonderful exhibit about how seriously to take these people.


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review