Senate vote brings US climate legislation one step closer to reality
The US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted in favour of the Boxer-Kerry climate bill despite non-participation from the Republicans on the committee. The committee had enough votes to pass the bill in their absence, and did so on November 5th.
The controversy began when the EPA decided not to run a full economic impact analysis of the bill since the bill is 90% identical to the Waxman-Markey climate bill, and because the run would be expensive ($135,000) and time consuming (1600 person-hours). The GOP requested that the EPA run a full analysis anyway, and refused to come to committee until it was complete.
Chairwoman Barbara Boxer defended the unilateral process, and said that “majorities are there to be used when the majority feels it is in the best interest of their states and of the nation to act.”
Key differences between the Senate and House bills include a more stringent medium-term GHG reduction targets (Senate demands cuts of 20% over 2005 levels by 2020, compared to the House’s 17% cut) and different offsets rules (the Senate bill allows only a quarter of total offsets to be sourced internationally and devalues them by 20% after 2018, while the House bill allows half of total offsets to be international, and maintains their equivalency to domestic ones). The bill’s passage advances the Senate’s response to the House’s Waxman-Markey bill, and puts the US one step further along the long path to adopting climate legislation.
Read more about key differences between the House and Senate Bills here on grist.org and see a quick article about the Bill’s passage here on huffingtonpost.com
