We did that because, first, they deserve a little attention for doing their jobs well – we’ve spotlighted Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), but there are plenty of others who have done the home work and shared what they’ve learned. That they mostly support nuclear energy – well, surely the mark of advanced intelligence, no?
And second, because all this good work can get drowned out when you run into comments like this:
This whole thing strikes me [as] if it weren’t so serious as being a comedy, you know? I mean, we just went from winter to spring. In Missouri, when we go from winter to spring, that’s a good climate change. I don’t want to stop that climate change, you know? Who in the world want to put politicians in charge of the weather anyway? What a dumb idea.
At least this seems an intentional joke:
Some of the models said that we’re going to have surf at the front steps of the Capitol pretty soon. I was really looking forward to that.
That’s Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) on the floor of the House. Leaving aside the confusion about weather and climate, this does not seem responsive to the legislation or to the needs of policy. While we grant that deriding policy you don’t like is a grand old tradition, and that supporting wrong-headed legislation is never a good idea, we’re not sure presenting this as an argument on the House floor is particularly useful.
Viewing Rep. Akin’s homepage, we find he is intensely interested in a shortfall of Navy fighter planes. We’d love to hear more from him on that subject.
Rep. Todd Akin. He serves on the House Energy and Environment subcommittee, which passed the climate change (cap-and-trade) bill; we bet his questions of witnesses there aren’t all that bad.
Comments
Given the political and regional differences associated not only with climate change policy, but also with energy policy, there will be a great many differences among members of Congress and their constituents as this debate ensues. Many support cap-and-trade scheme; others a carbon tax. There is the question of allocations and how they should be distributed.
Reducing greenhouse gases while meeting future electricity demand is as serious an issue as Congress as debated in some time. Sure, there are strong feelings on both sides. There also are many members of Congress who are devoted to striking a legislative balance that enhances our environment without putting an undue economic burden on consumers.
Electricity bills will increase in the years to come as our high-tech conveniences suck more power from the grid. Add to that the cost of power plants and a smart grid to maintain the electric system reliability we enjoy today, and it’s easy to see why Congress must support cost-effective carbon reductions