ENERGY BILL VOTE PASSES 219 TO 212

6:27 PM JUNE 26,09 IF THIS PASSES IT WILL BE THE WORLD CARBON TAX AS PREDICTED.THE U.N,WTO ARE ALSO INVOLVED IN THIS TAX ENVIROMENTAL SCAM.

7:23PM JUNE 26,09 THE CLIMATE BILL PASSES THE HOUSE BY A VOTE OF 219 FOR 212 AGAINST.THE LEGISLATION NOW GOES TO THE SENATE FOR FINAL PASSAGE.U CAN BET WHEN IT PASSES THE SENATE IN THE FUTURE THE EUROPEAN UNION WILL THEN CONTROL THE ENVIROMENT AND THE ECONOMIES OF THE WHOLE WORLD LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS WILL HAPPEN SINCE THIS WAS A GLOBAL BILL.

C-SPAN LIVE TV
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx

House narrowly passes major energy-climate bill By H. JOSEF HEBERT and DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writers JUNE 26,09

WASHINGTON – In a triumph for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed sweeping legislation Friday that calls for the nation's first limits on pollution linked to global warming and aims to usher in a new era of cleaner, yet more costly energy.The vote was 219-212, capping months of negotiations and days of intense bargaining among Democrats. Republicans were overwhelmingly against the measure, arguing it would destroy jobs in the midst of a recession while burdening consumers with a new tax in the form of higher energy costs.The House's action fulfilled Speaker Nancy Pelosi's vow to clear major energy legislation before July 4, and sent the measure to a highly uncertain fate in the Senate.Obama lobbied recalcitrant Democrats by phone from the White House as the debate unfolded across several hours, and Al Gore posted a statement on his Web site saying the measure represents an essential first step towards solving the climate crisis.The former vice president won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work drawing attention to the destructive potential of global warming.On the House floor, Democrats hailed the legislation as historic, while Republicans said it would damage the economy without solving the nation's energy woes.It is the most important energy and environmental legislation in the history of our country,said Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts.It sets a new course for our country, one that steers us away from foreign oil and towards a path of clean American energy.But Rep. John Boehner, the House Republican leader, used an extraordinary one-hour speech shortly before the final vote to warn of unintended consequences in what he said was a defining bill.He called it a bureaucratic nightmare that would cost jobs, depress real estate prices and put the government into parts of the economy where it now has no role.

The legislation would require the U.S. to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by about 80 percent by mid-century. That was slightly more aggressive than Obama originally wanted, 14 percent by 2020 and the same 80 percent by mid-century.U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are rising at about 1 percent a year and are predicted to continue increasing without mandatory limits.Under the bill, the government would limit heat-trapping pollution from factories, refineries and power plants and issue allowances for polluters. Most of the allowances would be given away, but about 15 percent would be auctioned by bid and the proceeds used to defray higher energy costs for lower-income individuals and families.Some would like to do more. Some would like to do less,House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said in advance of the final vote.But we have reached a compromise ... and it is a compromise that can pass this House, pass that Senate, be signed by the president and become law and make progress.

One of the biggest compromises involved the near total elimination of an administration plan to sell pollution permits and raise more than $600 billion over a decade — money to finance continuation of a middle class tax cut. About 85 percent of the permits are to be given away rather than sold in a ceoncession to energy companies and their allies in the House — and even that is uncertain to survive in the Senate.The final bill also contained concessions to satisfy farm-state lawmakers, ethanol producers, hydroelectric advocates, the nuclear industry and others, some of them so late that they were not made public until 3 a.m. on Friday.Supporters and opponents agreed the result would be higher energy costs but disagreed vigorously on the impact on consumers. Democrats pointed to two reports — one from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the other from the Environmental Protection Agency — that suggested average increases would be limited after tax credits and rebates were taken into account. The CBO estimated the bill would cost an average household $175 a year, the EPA $80 to $110 a year.Republicans questioned the validity of the CBO study and noted that even that analysis showed actual energy production costs increasing $770 per household. Industry groups have cited other studies showing much higher costs to the economy and to individuals.The White House and congressional Democrats argued the bill would create millions of green jobs as the nation shifts to greater reliance on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar and development of more fuel-efficient vehicles — and away from use of fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal.

It will make our nation the world leader on clean energy jobs and technology, declared Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who negotiated deals with dozens of lawmakers in recent weeks to broaden the bill's support.Pelosi, D-Calif., took an intense personal interest in the measure, sitting through hours of meetings with members of the rank and file and nurturing fragile compromises. At its heart, the bill was a trade-off, less than the White House initially sought though it was more than Republicans said was acceptable. Some of the dealmaking had a distinct political feel. Rep. Alan Grayson, a first-term Democrat, won a pledge of support that $50 million from the proceeds of pollution permit sales in the bill would go to a proposed new hurricane research facility in his district in Orlando, Fla.This is revolutionary. This is a moment in history,declared Markey, a co-sponsor of the bill.

Republicans saw it differently.

This amounts to the largest tax increase in American history under the guise of climate change,declared Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind. On the Net: American Clean Energy and Security Act: http://tinyurl.com/ph52vs

Major energy-climate bill chugs toward House vote By H. JOSEF HEBERT and DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writers JUNE 26,09

WASHINGTON – With President Barack Obama lobbying by phone, the Democratic-controlled House churned toward a showdown vote Friday night on historic legislation to reduce pollution linked to global warming and power the nation with cleaner but more expensive energy.Democrats struggled to solidify a fragile coalition needed for passage and appeared headed for success. We don't have the votes to stop this bill, conceded Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., as the roll call neared on a measure that Republicans said would kill jobs across the country while pushing consumer energy costs higher.Republicans sought to delay the inevitable. Moments before a final vote was scheduled, House Republican John Boehner of Ohio plunged into a lengthy speech, methodically raising questions about numerous changes that he said Democrats had made public after 3 a.m. Friday.He called the bill the most profound piece of legislation to come to this floor in 100 years,but one that would create a bureaucratic nightmare without solving the nation's energy problems.Supporters and opponents agreed the result would be higher energy costs but disagreed vigorously on the impact on consumers. Democrats pointed to two reports — one from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the other from the Environmental Protection Agency — that suggested average increases would be limited after tax credits and rebates were taken into account. The CBO estimated the bill would cost an average household $175 a year, the EPA $80 to $110 a year, but Republicans and industry groups said the real figure would much higher.The White House and congressional Democrats argued the bill would create millions of green jobs as the nation shifts to greater reliance on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar and development of more fuel efficient vehicles — and away from use of fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal.It will make our nation the world leader on clean energy jobs and technology,declared Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who negotiated deals with dozens of lawmakers in recent weeks to broaden the bill's support.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had pledged to get the legislation passed before lawmakers left on their July 4 vacation. She took an intense personal interest in the measure, sitting through hours of meetings with members of the rank and file and nurturing fragile compromises.At its heart, the bill was a trade-off, less than the White House initially sought though it was more than Republicans said was acceptable. Some of the dealmaking had a distinct political feel. Rep. Alan Grayson, a first-term Democrat, won a pledge of support that $50 million from the proceeds of pollution permit sales in the bill would go to a proposed new hurricane research facility in his district in Orlando., Fla.An administration plan to sell pollution permits and raise more than $600 billion over a decade — money to finance continuation of a middle class tax cut — was largely jettisoned due to opposition from energy companies and their allies in the House. The final bill also contained concessions to satisfy farm-state lawmakers, ethanol producers, hydroelectric advocates, the nuclear industry and others.The Senate has yet to act on the measure, and a major struggle is expected there. The bill's supporters would need 60 votes to overcome any Republican filibuster.In a long day of debate Friday, Democrats narrowly won a test vote, 217-205 that cleared the bill over its first hurdle. Thirty Democrats defected on that vote, reflecting the divisiveness of the issue.Even as the debate proceeded on the House floor, Obama made phone calls from the White House, seeking support from recalcitrant Democrats. Obama has made the measure a top priority of his first year, maintaining it will open the door to a clean energy economy,spur the growth of green jobs and make the United States a world leader on climate change.The legislation would impose first-ever limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollution from power plants, factories and refineries. It also would force a shift from coal and other fossil fuels to renewable and more efficient forms of energy.Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said the bill marked a fundamental change in U.S. climate and energy policy and characterized it as the most important environmental and energy legislation to ever have been considered by Congress.This is revolutionary. This is a moment in history,declared Markey, a co-sponsor of the bill.

Republicans saw it differently.

This amounts to the largest tax increase in American history under the guise of climate change,declared Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind. And Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., said it promises to destroy our standard of living and quality of life with higher energy costs, higher food prices and lost jobs.He called it the single largest economic threat to our farmers and ranchers in decades.But Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said there was a moral imperative to be good stewards of the earth and move the United States to the forefront in addressing the climate problem. The legislation, totaling about 1,200 pages, would require the U.S. to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by about 80 percent by the end of the century. That was slightly more aggressive than Obama originally wanted, 14 percent by 2020 and the same 80 percent by the dawn of the next century.U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are rising at about 1 percent a year and are predicted to continue increasing without mandatory limits.Under the bill, the government would limit heat-trapping pollution from factories, refineries and power plants and issue allowances for polluters. Most of the allowances would be given away, but about 15 percent cent would be auctioned by bid, and the proceeds used to defray higher energy costs for lower-income individuals and families.There was widespread agreement that under this cap-and-trade system, the cost of energy would almost certainly increase. But Democrats argued that much of the impact on taxpayers would be offset by the tax credits and rebates in the measure.

Republicans questioned the validity of the CBO study and noted that even that analysis showed actual energy production costs increasing $770 per household. Industry groups have cited other studies showing much higher costs to the economy and to individuals.On the Net:American Clean Energy and Security Act: http://tinyurl.com/ph52vs