We’ve got some growing to do.

Thursday, July 29th, 2010 @ 12:59 am | Clueless Conservatives, Energy, Environment

Ezra Klein gets to the heart of the difficulty in passing good environmental legislation:

If you wanted to design a threat that our political system couldn’t address, here’s what you’d do: You’d make the pain of doing nothing come much later, but the pain of doing something begin right now. You’d concentrate the costs of failure in poor countries, while the costs of a policy solution would be concentrated in certain regions of America. You’d make it hard to solve without the imposition of a new tax. You’d make sure that some of the largest and richest industries in the world had an enormous amount to fear from that tax.

Well, that settles it, I guess. Here goes our grand experiment in seeing what happens when you have over 400 parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere…soon to be 500;)

Future’s so bright…all we can be thankful for is that oil is depleting quickly enough to force alternative efforts. Hurrah to the Chevy Volt…and here’s hoping Dana Pico learns what an early adopter is! It’s somewhat expensive now, but the economies of scale are amazing things, aren’t they? One year’s $600 iPhone 2G is today’s $200 iphone 4.

And Dana can hope the petroleum lasts forever, but it won’t be because “little toy electric cars simply are not us.” Our oil supplies will not remain cheap and economical because it we need to drive manly beast cars. We are not able to endlessly pollute the earth’s atmosphere simply because we can’t be bothered to charge a car. Desire is going to run right up against possibility and lose that battle. Unfortunately, climate change legislation faces certain political impossibilities because the GOP continues to drop the ball on our future and our grandchildren’s future for the sake of present greed.

-hw

8 Responses to “We’ve got some growing to do.”

  1. Dana Says:

    Whistler’s mother’s favorite son wrote:

    Unfortunately, climate change legislation faces certain political impossibilities because the GOP continues to drop the ball on our future and our grandchildren’s future for the sake of present greed.

    Y’all have a 39-seat majority in the House of Representatives, and a 59-41 seat majority in the United States Senate, but it’s the Republican’s fault y’all couldn’t pass a huge tax increase on the American people crap and trade?

    If crap and trade can’t gain the support of a single Republican senator, when we have several RINOs in the Senate, have you ever considered that it might be because it’s a bad idea?

  2. Henry Whistler Says:

    Hmm, Dana, let me see if I have your figurin’ straight here…there are RINOS in the Senate…even though the Senate Republicans have obliterated all records for filibusters and essentially re-written the rules of the Senate to be 60 votes to win.

    And since there are RINOS, even though they have participated in every single one of those damaging filibusters, then the presence of yet another filibuster is proof that it’s just not a good idea. Because the RINOS, who have filibustered everything so far, would only vote for something if it were at least reasonable. Thus Obama has been unreasonable, else there would not be so many filibusters!

    Y’know, I just don’t quite have that figured out. Can you explain that better, Dana?

    You did just see our post about the DISCLOSE bill going down with 58 votes in favor, right?

  3. Dana Says:

    With Republican moderates like Senator Brown of Massachusetts or Senatrices Snowe and Collins of Maine, and y’all can’t persuade a single one of them to vote with you; sounds to me like even moderate Republicans recognize bad ideas when they see them.

    But hey, in just 96 days we’ll have another congressional election. If the public supports y’all’s ideas, you’ll pick up the seat or two you need in the Senate to make it filibuster-proof, and increase your majority in the House.

    But, I’ll recount the words of a friend at work, one who voted for Barack Obama: “I voted for change, but not this fornicating change!”

    He’s voting straight Republican in 96 more days.

  4. AJKamper Says:

    I’m not sure why someone would try to convince progressives that a law can’t be good law because conservatives won’t vote for it.

    The problem, for the Democrats, is that the Democratic Party is currently the home of ideological diversity, while with a couple of rare exceptions the Republican Party (especially in the Senate) has been pared down to the most conservative group. The Democrats pretty much owned the center over the last couple elections.

    Sadly, this is about to change, for a number of reasons:
    1) Obama’s scared of telling the Senate what to do
    2) Republicans know that working with Democrats is political suicide for the party
    3) Economy’s recovering too slowly

    And so it goes.

  5. AJKamper Says:

    Actually, the more I think about it, the more I’m coming around to Dana’s position.

    That’s how I learned that spending increases and tax cuts are the best way to fiscal prosperity. That Medicare and Social Security are the best programs ever. Do I need to look at the statistics? The data? Analyze what effect these policies have had on the country? Nope. There’s only one number that matters: the number of votes it gets in the Senate. How do I know if something is good policy? The good people in Washington tell me so.

  6. Henry Whistler Says:

    Dana, I think I made it pretty clear that after the most insane explosion of filibusters in U.S. history, it’s impossible to describe any Republican Senator as moderate. Even if some are in temperament, they’re sufficiently threatened by the rest of the party to stay in line.

    AJ has the dynamics pegged. We had 60 because we brought in the middle grounders, thus that 60 was hard to control. Those few swing votes also disgracefully assumed complete control and made sure all their demands were met. I would mention also that President Obama actively resisted any penalties, even at the primary, for these “principled” stands. So the tail wagged the dog. Each bill that manages to pass is missing every best idea, watered down into near pointlessness.

    Of course, Dana, I think, as always, you know all of this quite well. The GOP had their gameplan…roadblock everything possible, blame the Democrats. You think, amazingly in the aftermath of Bush’s two terms of destruction, that more Republicans somehow translates into better government. We’re pretending to talk about the issues, but you just have that gameplan, and you cheerily implement it.

    Meanwhile, Republicans followed up killing DISCLOSE and protecting big money with voting to kill $12 billion of loan coverage to small banks. How many votes did it take? 41.

    Oh, that’s not all!

    House Republicans late Thursday were able to corral enough votes to defeat a bill that would have provided up to $7.4 billion in aid to those sickened by toxins resulting from the 9/11 attacks.

    Yeah! Go GOP!

    Any Democrat with half a gonad could mop the floor with you guys in November. I’m not saying all of them do, but every one who does will win.

  7. Dana Says:

    Perhaps if you has been a little more complete with the truth on that bill, you’d have not posted that. The House was trying to pass that legislation under accelerated passage rules, which do not allow amendments to be made. Thus the House, which has a solid Democratic majority, needed a two-thirds supermajority to pass it, under those rules.

    Well, the GOP wanted to make amendments, such as denying the aid in that bill to illegal immigrants, an amendment which makes perfect sense to me. If the Democrats are willing to subject the bill to amendments, then they won’t need a single Republican vote to pass it.

  8. Henry Whistler Says:

    Yes, that’s the excuse Republicans offered. The problem is that the goalposts always move, and if amendments would have been allowed, there would have been more than just the illegal immigrant provision.

    You didn’t improve your position, Dana. Even if that were the only teensy weensie amendment the GOP wanted to add, they’d rather withhold the money from America’s heroes than allow a single dollar to touch an illegal immigrant.

    The GOP has taught us the past two years that there will be no cooperation. Whining about procedure in order to prevent Democrat successes is the goal.