The U.S. Climate Policy Debate: How Climate Politics are Moving Forward on Capitol Hill and in the...

8/8/2019 The U.S. Climate Policy Debate: How Climate Politics are Moving Forward on Capitol Hill and in the White House

1/28

The U.S. ClimatePolicy Debate

How climate politics are moving forward onCapitol Hill and in the White House

Tim Profeta

Director

Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions

Duke University

Cathleen Kelly

Director

Climate and Energy Program

The German Marshall Fund of the United States


2/28

2008 Te German Marshall Fund o the United States. All rights reserved.

No part o this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any orm or by any means without permission

in writing rom the German Marshall Fund o the United States (GMF). Please direct inquiries to:

Te German Marshall Fund o the United States

1744 R Street, NW

Washington, DC 20009

1 202 683 2650

F 1 202 265 1662

E [email protected]

Tis publication can be downloaded or ree at http://www.gmus.org/publications/index.cm. Limited print

copies are also available. o request a copy, send an e-mail to [email protected].

GMF Paper Series

Te GMF Paper Series presents research on a variety o transatlantic topics by sta, ellows, and partners othe German Marshall Fund o the United States. Te views expressed here are those o the author and do not

necessarily represent the view o GMF. Comments rom readers are welcome; reply to the mailing address above

or by e-mail to [email protected].

About GMF

Te German Marshall Fund o the United States (GMF) is a non-partisan American public policy and

grant-making institution dedicated to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between North

America and Europe.

GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening leaders

to discuss the most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining ways in which transatlantic cooperation can

address a variety o global policy challenges. In addition, GMF supports a number o initiatives to strengthendemocracies.

Founded in 1972 through a gi rom Germany on the 25th anniversary o the Marshall Plan as a permanent

memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF maintains a strong presence on both sides o the Atlantic. In addi-

tion to its headquarters in Washington, DC, GMF has seven ofces in Europe: Berlin, Bratislava, Paris, Brussels,

Belgrade, Ankara, and Bucharest.


3/28

The U.S. Climate Policy Debate

How climate politics are moving forwardon Capitol Hill and in the White House

T P*

D

N I E P S

Dk U

C K*

D

C E PT G M F U S

Ex S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

S D C--T L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

S H C D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

EPA E A G G R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

T U.S. P C P C C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

* C K C E P G M F U S k U S 14 . A GMF, M. K U.S., E, , .

* T P N I E P S Dk U. S2005, I j - k , x . M. P x- C H . S 2005, k -- .

T k k K L, D M, K F .


4/28


5/28

The U.S. Climate Policy Debate:

How Climate Politics are Moving Forward on Capitol Hill and in the White House3

T B k U.S.

. B j

S Bk O

S J MC

P B

. A, j

k C

x ,

U S .

S,

k

. T ,

U.S.

,

. T ,

. B

U S

x . T U.S.

.

S

U.S. S

--

U.S. . T

, 2003

S J

L S MC

,

( q

k )

U S

k. B

. F x, S

-- , S J B S

R L ( k

S F R C)

(

) k U.S

. T

j ,

C I.

S

U.S. H R.T x

D

H 2006 ,

R j

. F

, , H Sk N P

. S S C E

I G W

, H E C

C, C J D,

2007

2008. S, k S,

,

H.

S

U.S. E P A (EPA)

U.S. . E

k S C

2007 EPA ,

, ,

. H,

J 2008 A N P

Rk (ANPR)

. W

Executive Summary

Prospects for

aggressive feder

action to reduce

greenhouse gas

emissions are

greater than

they have been

in years. To be

sure, formidable

challenges still

confront those

who would enac

such policies.


6/28

The German Marshall Fund of the United States4

C A A , N

U.S.

, j

k EPA . T ANPR

B

.

L,

U.S. ,

MC O, U.S.

. A , j B

. F, MC O

,

. F x,

-- , S

O -

S MC. A,

j C

I

. W

U.S.C,

, k ,

.


7/28



O J 6, 2008, U.S. S S

B Bx U.S.

. I

z D

R,

. Rq 60 S

,

48 36, x

. D

, S Mj LH R S Bx

, R

. T

k S Bx 20072008

U.S. C.

T , x

,

U.S.

S. S 54

Bx ;

.

N .

T J 6 S j

U.S. -- ,

. E

U.S.

U.S. .

N,

C.

1.1 The Lieberman/McCain and Lieberman/Warner proposals

T J ,

.

I C, 2003,

S J L C

S J MC Az

--

U.S.

. T

,

, x ,

,

. B

2003 2005 L

MC ,

2003

1990 2016 2005

2000 2012.

T U.S. S L/

MC , 2003 2005. I 2003,

43

55 (

).1 I 2005,

38-60 D

S k

.2 P 2005

L/MC , ,

S J

B N Mx, E

N R C. T

U S U S

1 ://..//LIS/__/___.?=108&=1&=00420

2 ://..//LIS/__/___.?=109&=1&=00148

The June 6th

Senate vote

established that

a majority of

senators suppor

the creation of a

comprehensive

U.S. greenhouse

gas cap-and-trad

program and

clearly highlighte

the full list of

issues that must

be resolved befo

a comprehensive

emission reductio

program can

win the support

of Congress.

Senate Debate on

Cap-and-Trade Legislation1


8/28


j k

.3 T

k

5344.4

W L/MC

, j

U.S.

,

. T, 2005 L/

MC B

--

. T

B

L/MC

. B x 2005 S

,

j

:

Concerns about cost containment, or how

to limit the potential cost of a cap-and-trade

program without eroding its environmental

effectiveness . L/MC

z x

k

k

(..,

). M ,

L/MC

k

,

, 15

. E

3 S. A. 866 (2005).

4 ://..//LIS/__/___.?=109&=1&=00149

x

.

B (

j )

. T

--

S B 2005. T B

,

. T

x, k

x ,

k. T

,

. S

. E

k E U (EU) E

T S U.S.

EU . T

k.

Concerns about the United States competitiveness

in a global market. T B j

U S C I

k U S


9/28



j

. T

C K P

1997. B B

U.S. --

-

U S .

1.2 The 200708 U.S. Congress

A 2007, j

U.S. S

. F,

N 2006 , D P

k S ,

S

D . N

S

E P Wk C,

j .

S Bx, S

, k S J I,

. T 2006

- E P

Wk C

k

S I.

I ,

.

An Inconvenient Truth, V

P A G,

D

. TMassachusetts vs. EPA

S C A 2007

EPA

C

.5

C

EPA,

C. A

q

A

C k .

Cq, 2007

C --

. S L S MC

,

-

x 70 2005

2050.6

S B

-- J 2007

S A S, R

P.7 T B/

S MC/

L

(..,

). I

, q

1990

2030. F, B/S

U.S.

. T ,

B S

. U ,

$12

,

k . T U.S. , B/S

5Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S.497 (2007).

6 S. 280 (2007).

7 S. 1766 (2007).

In the November

2006 elections,

the Democratic

Party took contro

of the Senate by

a slim margin,

which transferre

the chairmanship

of all Senate

committees

to Democratic

members and

re-opened the

Environment and

Public Works

Committee as

an avenue for

creating climate

legislation.


10/28


The Lieberman/

Warner proposal

rejected Senator

Bingamans

safety valve

approach, opting

instead to create

a Carbon Market

Efficiency Board

to help manage

program costs.

q

. T

U.S.

k. M

x j. T ,

,

2020.

1.3 The Senate Environment and Public

Works Committee (EPW)

E 2007, S EPW C

. C Bx

,

S L S J W

V

J 27, 2007. T ,

A C S A,8

O 18.

L W k CBx L/MC

.

F,

q 15 2005

2020. S,

. U L/

W , 73

. T j

. T

2031. T

U.S.

8 S. 2191 (2007).

. T L/W

-

, ,

- ,

,

. T

- .

O

U.S.

. T

U.S. S

D U.S. A I

D (USAID)

x $200

, j .

T L/W

S

. O , S

L S W j S

B ,

C Mk E B

. T C B

k k

U.S. . T C B

, S W, S

L G, S B L,

S M L J 2007,9 B

:

(

)

9 S. 1866 (2007).


11/28



While the

legislation did

not include a

guaranteed

ceiling on the

price of emission

allowances like

the Bingaman/

Specter proposa

the Carbon

Board would

allow for market

intervention if th

program posed

unacceptable

costs on the

U.S. economy.

k, /

q

.

W

k

B/S , C

B k

U.S. . O

, L/W B/S

k

.

T ,

L/W

15

. T

15

-- , EU E T

S. T U.S. k

k k ,

k

k. B, L/W

.

I,

.

A L/W

EPW ,

q

:

Maintaining state authority to regulate

greenhouse gas emissions . T

k

,

. S

--

q. Cq,

j

q

. U

C Bx C, -

.

Ensuring the credibility of carbon offsets . B

L/MC ,

L/W

. T

K P

C D M (CDM)

U.S. k.

Avoiding manipulation of the emissions trading

market. W

k U

S, C

k

. T L/

W

, EPW

S.


12/28


T EPW 118 D 5,

2007. A

EPW , j

j

k k . A D

, S W,

R

, S W,

.

1.4 Senate Floor debate

S , S Mj

L R C Bx

L/W J 2, 2008.

T x x

k

. N

,

.

T

C Bx

.10 Mj :

T

,

- . I

C B, Bx

2031 2050

. T

EPA

$22 $30.

T q

,

-- k

2012, 2020.

10 S. 3036 (2008).

A

k k

k .

C j

qk . I ,

U.S.

10

. T

Bx A

5 j- ,

x C

D M j.

T

. A

-- , k E

E T S.

A I C E D

F

2012 2017. T

z . O

.

O ,

x $180

,

.


13/28



U, L/W ,

S

k. M

491- M 26 k

S .

W S

J 2,

k

-

. I , , ,

k . T

U.S. .

I ,

. S B Ck, R

T,

. R

, Ck

z x.

G D

S,

-

. B , R

k

.

M , R

S k J 4

491 x.

A , Mj L R

k , , .

T 60 , 4836 x

.11 R

D

.

T

Bx ,

D,

,

Bx

. T

,

U.S. ,

, ,

.

1.5 Aftermath

I ,

. I k

U.S. S

k 2008. B S

2009,

C C C D,

. S J

2008 S ,

:

T D

Bx

S Mj L R

z , k k

. T k

x U.S. C.

11 ://..//LIS/__/___.?=110&= 2&=00145


14/28


While the Senate

does not have

the authority to

ratify a treaty, the

U.S. Constitution

requires the

Senate to approve

by a two-thirds

majority (67 votes)

treaties drafted by

the governments

Executive

Branch with

other countries.

S B

Bx

q

.

T EPW

x

j . D

S x

S ,

k

.

1.6 Status of Senate discussion of U.S.

participation in a future international

climate agreement

T S

U S

. W

S

, U.S. C q S

- j (67 )

Ex B . T U S

S. B q -

S, C

k. 12

T S k

, x,

, k

U S

k . T

S k , S

. T

x

12 T U S S. J 14, 2008, ://../////T.

q S .13 I ,

x k

x

k U.S. .14

A U.S. P B C

K P S

, S

U S k

. A

UN 1995, C B M,

z

, j

.15 I J 1997, K

P z, U.S. S

950

S R C. B, D W

V S Ck H, R

Nk.16 T

S B/H S U.S.

U S z

D C P

.17 E

13 T U S S. J 14, 2008, ://../////T.

14 N P. P W U.S. C L;

C Ex A C P A- R F. A, 2008, ://../P/.x, J 14, 2008.

15 UNFCCC. R C P FS, H B M 28 A 7, 1995. FCCC/CP/1995/7/A.1, J 6, 1995.

16 S. 98 (1997).

17 S. 98 (2002).


15/28



V P G K P N 1998, C

S .

S P

I C,

P C k

j S.

S B/

H . F, ,

-

k I C

j

U.S. . S, C

,

. T,

P C, D, R-

U.S. C . F,

C BM K P

-

. 18

1.7 Recent Biden/Lugar amendment

D J 2008 S

Bx , S B,

S F R C,

S L, k

, (S. R. 30,

SA4836) U.S.

. T U

S UN

18 D S, ClimateWire, INTERNATIONAL NE-GOTIATIONS: A , U.S. (03/26/2008)

U.S. , B A P,

j

.19 T -

15 (13 D

R), 2008

, S O S MC.

T

U S z . W

j ,

k

k

.20 T k

S

. W B/H

q

,

B/L x

,

.

A B/L

(S. R. 312) S F R

C M 2006,

.21 B

L

(S. R. 30)22 J 2007

S ,

q - . B

19 S. 3036 (2008).

20 S. 3036 (2008).

21 S. 312 (2006).

22 S. 30 (2007).


16/28


Members

of Congress

and industry

stakeholders

continue to have

deep concerns

about how U.S.

participation in

a climate treaty

that does not

include binding

commitments

from China

and India will

impact U.S.

competitiveness.

S D

.

T

B/H , B L

M 2008

k

2008.

T B R

2009 A

k

S k . T

2008 2009,

. T

,

U S

2008.

1.8 Implications of the Biden/Lugaramendment for the Senate debate

going forward

T C H

B/H 1997,

x

x j

. B

C k

U.S.

C I

U.S. . T

B/L

x

S k U.S.

,

,

, j

C I.


17/28



I S, U.S. H R

. U D

k H 2007,

k R

. T

-

H L/MC,

R W G M

J O M. A 2007,

H k .

T q H j. I

,

U.S. H E C

C, C J

D M C,

Rk B V. C D

-

H

C H.

B, , V

. B C x

. P , H

Sk P J 2007 S

C E I G

W R E

Mk M, -k

,

.

T P

D. I F 2007,

, D

P k

E C C.

2.1 Energy and Commerce Committee

W , C

D R B

H .

D

,

--

. F 2007, C

U.S. C, D

B

. E

x

U.S.

6080 2050. V

. I J 2008, B

.

B 2007, E

C C ,

. I,

C

z

.23 T

:

S C--T P (O

2007). T (1) U

S 60-80

2050; (2) U S

- ;

(3) --

. T

--

.

C C/E

D C (J 2008).

T ,

23 T ://../C_C/x..

Status of the House Climate Debate

2


18/28


: (1) B/

S

q -

; (2)

k

; (3)

.A R D L

G (F 2008). T

, , k

x

-

- .

G M G G R

O M (M 2008). T

, .

T C

,

x .

2.2 Select Committee on Energy

Independence and Global Warming

C P

D, S C E

I G W

, x , . S

, C 45

.

O J 4, 2008, S C C

Mk, E

C C, .

T , I C

A P A,

L/W

. T Mk :

j

L/MC

85 2005

2050

94

100 2020

B/S

q

T Mk

x

k.

2.3 The future of the House debate

I

H R.C D k

H.

H k

,

R B

. B

k

S

S .

T S

k H ,

H


19/28



. K

C N

R, C W M,

C A. B

, D

k .

2.4 Prospects for passing legislation prior

to the 2009 Climate Conference in

Copenhagen

I, U.S.

S H,

. T

U S

k

S U.S. . B S

H , k C

D 2009

C

. T H S , ,

k U S

k k

2009 C

C. T U.S. k

2010 -

C k

- U S. A

,

j ,

,

U.S. S.

The U.S. House

and Senate

debates are likely

to advance enoug

to allow the Unite

States to agree

to a framework

that lays out key

parameters for

a future climate

treaty at the 200

Copenhagen

Conference.


20/28


O J 11, 2008, U.S. EP A (EPA)

2007 S C

. A

S C EPA

,

x U.S.

k . T ,

j

, .

3.1 Early Background

T 2007

S C

C .

I 1998 1999, EPA

EPA

C A A

x . Sq,

1999, 19 z k EPA

C A A. T ,

,

P C .

T B

z

,

. C , EPA

EPA ,

S 2003, EPA k

. I ,

C A A z EPA

.E , EPA

. T

j,

C,

,

.24 T

U S C A D

C,

U.S. S C.

3.2 April 2007 Supreme Court Decision

T U.S. S C

N 2006, k, 5-4

A 2007. IMassachusetts

v. EPA, C EPA

x

(CO2) , CO2, C A A

. T C EPA

C

EPA

. [C

A] A , EPA

x

x

.

3.3 EPAs Public Health and Welfare

Endangerment Findings

I k , P B

k

D T, E,

A k U.S.

x . A, EPA A

24 U.S. S C DMassachusetts v. EPA, by Mi-chael Gerrard, American Bar Association, http://www.abanet.org/abapubs/globalclimate/ April 11, 2007.

EPAs Evolving Approach to

Greenhouse Gas Regulation3


21/28



The EPA Task

Force, backed

by significant

scientific analys

concluded

that there was

compelling and

robust evidence

that emissions

endangered pub

welfare, and that

the Administrato

was required by

law to act.

S J k x

. (A

q C

A A.) A ,

U.S.

j .25

F q

, , B .

A ,

O M

B (OMB),

N E C, C

E Q, V P Dk

C ,

. A,

EPA

,

EPA J 2008 A N P

Rk ( ).26

3.4 White House rejects previous EPA

positions and staff recommendations

D ,

EPA . F x,

O, EPA

A k,

25 EPA W A E T Y, J E R. J S, The Washington Post, . A1, J 11, 2008; EPA Sk C E R, T DE, J E, The Washington Post, . A4, J 12,2008.

26 E, J 11 12, 2008.

, , .., EPA k /

,

?27 N, J

.

I, D 2007, EPA Tk F,

k ,

,

A q .

I D 2007 2008,

j

C A A. F x,

:

T O M B

- EPA

.28

EPA A J -

D j

C A A.29

I A, P B

k ,

C A A

.30

27 J E R. J S. EPA W A E Y. The Washington Post, J 11, 2008, ://..////2008/07/10/AR2008071003087_..

28 J E,EPA E- C G WE P H, S S The Washington Post,J 25, 2008, ://../-///2008/07/24/AR2008072403423..

29 ://..//.

30 EPA W A E T Y, J E R.J S, The Washington Post, . A1, J 11, 2008.


22/28


3.5 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking(ANPR)

T J

11, 2008 A N P Rk

(ANPR), k

C A A

. T

EPA

W H EPA

, B

j ,

k. A OMBO I R A

D A,

E, C, T

j C A A

, , ,

, ,

, k .31

A, OMB EPA

.

EPA A J ,

ANPR C A A,

, - k

. B

,

, -

, k,

.32

31 EPA Sk C E R, T DE, J E, The Washington Post, . A4, J 12,2008.

32 EPA, ANPR P, J 11, 2008.

I, C . I k H R

. O J 30, R. M Bk

(j H R)

EPA

C A

A. T (H.R. 6666)

A ,

x . W

k D

C,

C A A

. I A, U.S. C C C

EPA

C A A.

A q ,

EPA x k

P B.

T S C k A

, ,

x P ,

q ,

C A A. M k

q

C A A, C

EPA x

- . T,

C A A

k k

C k 2009 2010

U.S. .


23/28



As a Republican

McCains

leadership

role in the U.S.

climate debate

is particularly

notable in that

he broke from

Republican Party

ranks by taking a

radically differen

stance on global

warming than

President Bush.

4.1 Senator John McCain

A ,

S MC

S,

S L 2003,

--

U S. F , MC

, ,

C

. MC S

C C. A R,

MC U.S.

k

R P k k

P

B, q

-- .

I M 2008, S MC

-- U.S.

2005 2012 1990

2020, 60

1990 2050. T

2007 MC L

.

I -

MC U

S

50 2050

G-8 J 2008 G-8

J. P B

E 50

1990

2050,

J 2007 G-8 H,

G C

A Mk. W B 50 2050

2008 G-8 ,

1990 (P B

2005 ).

I MC -

1990 2020

E U

25 40

1990 2020. D 2007

C P UN Fk

C C C B, B j EU

2020 ,

U S.

D M 2008 , S

MC

k

P B k

.

H k

U S . I

. I -

K. T U

S

k

.33 MC

P B

I D.

S MC C, I,

. N

k z

-

33 S R J MC V T F P, O. M 12, 2008.

The U.S. Presidential Candidates

Positions on Climate Change4


24/28


. MC z

, [] U S

E

. H

- I

C k . I

,

,

, .34 T

B/L B

j

2008 G-8

Mj E M J.

I M 2008 , S MC

x

- q

U S. H

C,

I,

. A z k ,

I k E U

k-

,

.

A M 2008 , S

MC z

M R P

. S k

MC R .

T

34 S R J MC V T F P, O. M 12, 2008.

z k -

U.S. K P.35

4.2 Senator Barack Obama

S O -

L MC,

60

1990 2050 ( q

70 2005 ),

1990 2020. S O

- G W P

R A (S. 309),

S B S V S

Bx J 2007. I

1990 2020,

27 1990 2030, 53

2040, 80 2050.36

I O 2007 , S

O

80 2050

,

.37 O P B

S 2007 Mj E M

B

17

. O ,

A

x kI,

W

W

35 The Washington Post, C R B MC C P M D. S, .A1 A4.M, J 7, 2008.

36 S. 309 (2007).

37 S S Bk O, Real Leadership for a CleanEnergy Future, P, N H, O 8, 2007.


25/28



During the

October 2007

speech, Senator

Obama promised

that, if elected, h

would transform

the United States

into a leader

on climate

change solutions

.38 D

O 2007 , S O

, , U

S .

H

j

G E F

x . I

UN -K k.39

O k j

.40 Lk MC, S

O j ,

C I,

.41

4.3 How an Obama or McCain presidency

would likely impact U.S. climate policy

B MC O

P

B. B

x

, U.S.

. T

-

- U S,

P B

.




41 Rk S Bk O C C G A, C, I. A 23, 2007.

W S O U.S. S MC, R

- S

, MC

C

. H, k MC

M

, MC

--

U S.

B -

U S

50 2050 B

G-8

S O k 80

U.S. 1990

2050 S MC 60

1990 2050. W

W H, E

k x

. B O MC -

EU

25

40 1990 2020. T Bx

, S

J 2008, 15

2005 2020, . T

O MC ,

U S

E -

k .

L, k B/L

, O

MC W H, U S

j , C I.


26/28


I N,

U S 2009.

A

-- .

S ,

U S j

. S,

,

--

EPA- .

T W P

H E C C

x

.

A ,

,

. A

,

k,

. I ,

x . S,

x

k ,

j

,

, -, .

A,

. S,

S q 60 (

j 51)

. E , j, D S

N , k

60- . I , , ,

k -- . T,

, --

, C

D j (

x). T ,

L/W/Bx ,

k.

F, ,

EPA

. E

,

q

C A A . B,

x

C A A C

qk --

C A A .

S, ,

,

, . A P

O, k D

j,

. A

R

, S MC -

R -

C. I , U S z 2009.

Conclusion

5


27/28


28/28

Off i c e s

Washington Berlin Bratislava ParisBrussels Belgrade Ankara Bucharest

www.gmu.org

The U.S. Climate Policy Debate: How Climate Politics are Moving Forward on Capitol Hill and in the...

Documents

Transcript of The U.S. Climate Policy Debate: How Climate Politics are Moving Forward on Capitol Hill and in the...