The federal Environmental Protection Agency announced on Dec. 23 that it would go a step further starting in 2012 by setting greenhouse gas standards for power plants and petroleum refineries — which together account for nearly 40 percent of the emissions blamed for climate change.

But Obama can expect even more hostility to his climate agenda starting in January, when the rival Republican Party takes charge of the House of Representatives.

Representative Fred Upton of Michigan, the Republican who will head the new House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the United States should be “working to bring more power online, not shutting plants down” to protect jobs.

“We will not allow the administration to regulate what they have been unable to legislate,” Upton said.

But Reid said Senate Democrats had not yet resolved how to address the controversial issue of pollution reduction. The Senate is not expected to adopt the comprehensive “cap and trade” scheme that was included in a bill passed by the House. Republicans say it would drive up energy costs for companies and consumers, especially in coal-dependent states.

The Senate bill may target emissions from power plants, Reid said. “We’re looking at a way of making sure that when we talk about pollution, that we’re focused just on the utility section,” he told reporters Tuesday.

When pressed to specify whether the Senate would seek a “cap on utility carbon emissions,” Reid responded, “Those words are not in my vocabulary….we’re going to work on pollution.”

What does he mean by pollution? “It means there’s bad stuff in the air,” Reid responded, declining to provide further details.

“The problem for Democrats is that debating the Democrat cap-and-trade bill might not fit neatly into the White House messaging plan since it’s been widely reported that a major part, a major part of the Kerry-Lieberman bill was essentially written by BP,” McConnell said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. “Let me say that again. A major part of the Kerry-Lieberman bill was written by BP. This is clearly an inconvenient fact.”

McConnell made his comments at a time when Congress is debating a “compromise” global warming bill introduced in May by Kerry and Lieberman in the wake of the deep-water oil rig explosion in April that killed 11 men and has dumped thousands of crude oil into Gulf Coast waters.

McConnell also charged that Democrats want to “piggy back” the Kerry-Lieberman bill into legislation being considered to mitigate future oil spills.

“At the same time as Americans wonder when this gusher will ever be plugged, we hear word that the administration and my good friend the majority leader [Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.] want to piggy back their controversial new national energy tax–also known as cap and trade–to an oil spill response bill that could and should be an opportunity for true bipartisan cooperation,” McConnell said.

“So here again, we see the administration using a crisis–in this case the disaster in the gulf–as an opportunity to muscle through Congress another deeply unpopular bill that has profound implications for small business and struggling households,” McConnell said.

The measure also would allow states directly affected to veto drilling plans of nearby states if they could show that significant negative effects would result from an accident.

The legislation aims to cut by 2020 carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases by 17 percent below 2005 levels and more than 80 percent by 2050. It also would set a price on carbon emissions for large polluters such as coal-fired power plants.

“We can finally tell the world that America is ready to take back our role as the world’s clean energy leader,” Kerry said at a news conference, surrounded by environmentalists and leaders from an array of energy companies.

“This is a bill for energy independence after a devastating oil spill, a bill to hold polluters accountable, a bill for billions of dollars to create the next generation of jobs and a bill to end America’s addiction to foreign oil,” Kerry said, calling stakes for the bill “sky high.”

President Barack Obama hailed the measure, which has been in the works for months.

“The challenges we face — underscored by the immense tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico — are reason to redouble our efforts to reform our nation’s energy policies,” Obama said in a statement. “For too long, Washington has kicked this challenge to the next generation.”

Despite the lofty rhetoric, the measure faces bleak prospects in the Senate amid partisan disputes over the drilling provision and other issues, including immigration reform.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who had been the bill’s only Republican backer, withdrew his support last week, saying it is impossible to pass the legislation in the current political climate.

Graham issued a statement Wednesday offering tepid encouragement.

“I believe the broad concepts we came up with before (Graham withdrew) are transformational and are the most consumer- and business-friendly effort to date in dealing with carbon pollution” Graham said.

Most importantly, he added, the bill “can serve as a framework in allowing America to lead in the creation of alternative energy jobs and significantly reducing our dependency on foreign oil. With these goals in mind, I am interested in carefully reviewing the details of the new proposal.”

The 1,000-page bill, tweaked in recent days in response to the Gulf spill, requires an Interior Department study to determine whether states could be economically and environmentally affected by a leak from an offshore drilling rig.

States that can demonstrate significant negative effects could pass a law opposing a specific project.

States that go ahead with offshore drilling would retain 37.5 percent of the federal revenue generated — a shift from current policy. Now royalty revenue goes to the Treasury; states collect no royalties.

The bill includes a new gasoline tax through a mandated carbon permit system for oil and gas. Producers will pay a fee to emit CO2, which translates to higher gasoline prices as American motorists enter the year’s driving and vacation season.

Senators Kerry and Graham deny this constitutes a gas tax, although Graham admitted it “will be passed on” to consumers in higher prices at the pump.

An American Solutions poll last week found that 72% of Graham’s constituents in South Carolina believe if they are paying more for a gallon of fuel due to a government requirement, the additional cost is a tax. Nationwide, 71% of Americans oppose a new gas tax according to a separate American Solutions poll from April.

Without Graham’s sponsorship the bill may be dead on arrival, as his involvement suggested he could bring in other Republican votes, especially those in favor of expanding offshore drilling and nuclear power.

The political climate also presents a separate challenge for Senators who support the bill: American Solutions found last month that 67% of Independents, and 64% of all adults, are much less likely to vote for a candidate who supports a gas tax.

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), who has been working with Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) on a separate “cap and dividend” bill, could ultimately support the Kerry-Lieberman energy tax, which imposes a similar cap and dividend system on utilities.

“Cap and dividend” means capping carbon emissions and forcing companies to trade permits for the right to emit carbon dioxide. Such a system differs from cap and trade by banning third party permit exchanges, thereby preventing the creation of new Wall Street carbon markets.

Despite the name change, the overall plan remains unchanged: Reduce American energy consumption through higher costs for energy producers, which means higher energy prices for consumers.

President Obama characterized offshore drilling today as just one of many approaches necessary to achieve energy independence. White House spokesman Bill Burton said today that the White House will still press ahead with a larger climate bill that presumably includes cap-and-trade.

“This is something that the president thinks we need to move forward on as quickly as possible,” Burton told reporters at today’s briefing.

Burton wouldn’t say whether the White House hopes to see legislation passed before the November midterms.

Bruised by the health care debate and worried about what 2010 will bring, moderate Senate Democrats are urging the White House to give up now on any effort to pass a cap-and-trade bill next year.

“I am communicating that in every way I know how,” says Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), one of at least half a dozen Democrats who’ve told the White House or their own leaders that it’s time to jettison the centerpiece of their party’s plan to curb global warming.

The creation of an economy-wide market for greenhouse gas emissions is as the heart of the climate bill that cleared the House earlier this year. But with the health care fight still raging and the economy still hurting, moderate Democrats have little appetite for another sweeping initiative — especially another one likely to pass with little or no Republican support.

“We need to deal with the phenomena of global warming, but I think it’s very difficult in the kind of economic circumstances we have right now,” said Indiana Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh, who called passage of any economy-wide cap and trade “unlikely.”

At a meeting about health care last month, moderates pushed to table climate legislation in favor of a jobs bill that would be an easier sell during the 2010 elections, according to Senate Democratic aides.

“I’d just as soon see that set aside until we work through the economy,” said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). ?“What we don’t want to do is have anything get in the way of working to resolve the problems with the economy.”

“Climate change in an election year has very poor prospects,” added Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.). “I’ve told that to the leadership.”

At least some in the Democratic leadership appear to be listening.

Asked about cap-and-trade last week, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said: “At this point I’d like to see a complete bill but we have to be realistic.”

The delay was “just a matter of reality, they can’t get anything done at this time,” said Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.), who has previously supported climate legislation. He has said he wouldn’t support the current Senate proposal because of disagreements over its handling of nuclear energy.

The climate-bill delay sidetracks one of President Barack Obama’s top domestic priorities. Mr. Obama has said action to curb greenhouse gases would unleash investment in clean-energy technology and create jobs.

White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said Tuesday Mr. Obama was working with lawmakers to move the legislation as quickly as possible.

“This is an economic opportunity for the nation that will create millions of clean energy jobs while reducing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil, and it’s an opportunity that other countries like China and India are racing to take advantage of,” Mr. LaBolt said in an email.

Momentum for a climate bill has been undermined by fears that capping carbon-dioxide emissions — the inevitable product of burning oil and coal — would slow economic growth, raise energy costs and compel changes in the way Americans live.

“It’s really big, really, really hard, and is going to make a lot of people mad,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.).

Democrats looking ahead to the 2010 midterm elections are concerned about a backlash from voters in industrial and heartland states dependent on coal. Republicans are portraying Democrats’ “cap and trade” proposals, which call for capping overall U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions and allowing companies to buy and trade permits to emit those gases, as a “cap and tax” scheme.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSNQzSjb38g

Hotair posted an excerpt from a New York Times article that explains what happened.

The Environmental Protection Agency has directed two of its lawyers to makes changes to a YouTube video they posted that is critical of the Obama administration’s climate change policy.

The agency, citing federal policies, told the two lawyers, Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel, who are married and based in San Francisco, that they could mention their E.P.A. affiliation only once; must remove language specifying Mr. Zabel’s expertise and their years of employment with the agency; and must remove an image of the agency’s office in San Francisco.

They have been told that if they do not edit the video to comply with the policy, they could face disciplinary action.

The video, titled “The Huge Mistake,” was produced and posted in September. But the agency did not issue its warning until The Washington Post published a widely cited opinion article by the couple on Oct. 31 that raised concerns, echoing those in the video, about cap-and-trade legislation that the Obama administration supports.

We Californians are currently being subjugated by eco-tyrants, perhaps as no other group of American citizens before us. Therefore, Tea Party groups throughout the state are uniting to organize the following event:

MARCH ON SACRAMENTO
OPPOSING the ECO-TYRANNY CONTROLLING CALIFORNIA

Date: Friday, August 28, 2009.
Time: 1:00 pm – 5:00 pm
Location: Steps of the Capitol Building

For more information, please check out the Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition or Tea Party Patriots.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president’s cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.

President Barack Obama’s push for quick action by Congress on climate change legislation suffered a setback on Thursday when the U.S. Senate committee leading the drive delayed work on the bill until September.

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer said her self-imposed deadline of early August for finishing writing a bill to combat global warming has been put off until after Congress returns from a recess that ends in early September.

“We’ll do it as soon as we get back” from that break, Boxer told reporters. Asked if this delay jeopardizes chances the Senate will pass a bill this year, Boxer said, “Not a bit … we’ll be in (session) until Christmas, so I’m not worried about it.”

But Boxer did not guarantee Congress will be able to finish a bill and deliver it to Obama by December, when he plans to attend an international summit on climate change in Copenhagen.

“I want to take this as far as we can take it (before Copenhagen). The more we do the better,” Boxer said.

And if you need anymore proof as to what a farce Cap and Trade, a press release from the EPW even states:

is During a hearing today in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, EPA Administrator Jackson confirmed an EPA analysis showing that unilateral U.S. action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would have no effect on climate.

“It appears that the Republican Party leadership in the Congress has made a decision that they want to deny President Obama success, which means, in my mind, they are rooting against the country, as well,” the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee
chairman told WAMU radio host Diane Rehm on Tuesday morning, promoting his new book, “The Waxman Report.”

Still, he said that one House Republican leader, speaking to him after the climate change squeaker, predicted that “a lot” of GOP-ers would vote for the (presumably) weakened bill when it emerges from the Senate.