Here we go with EEI again. I see how Sen. Tom Carper (D., Dela.) — a member of the key Environment and Public Works and Finance committees — defended the House cap-and trade rationing scheme’s allocations and questioned any Senate effort to tinker with the . . . ahem, EEI-approved language.

“I think Edison Electric Institute, the utility industry themselves, have figured out a way to slice the baby almost perfectly,” Carper said. “And for us to go back and tamper with their, I think, remarkably good compromise, would be a big mistake.

To which a colleague responds: Should somebody tell Tom Carper that the wisdom of Solomon’s judgment wasn’t revealed in his ability to perfectly “slice the baby?” Butchering the child was not a good compromise then and the distribution scheme of Waxman-Markey isn’t a good one now.

And to which I add: maybe he’s on to something — cap-and-trade does entaill quite a bit of bloodletting, as Carper tacitly admits. Something slightly more Solomonic would be to pressure-test the rent-seeking alarmists — or, shall I say, those phony mothers — by asking, if this is so important, surely you support just taxing emissions instead, even though there’s no payoff for you in that? Mmmm. Yes.

This crowd rewriting the Constitution as they go is one thing. But for Heaven’s sake, leave the Old Testament alone.