Climate DA

8/8/2019 Climate DA

1/156

Climate PoliticsPage 1 of 156

7WJ HPSW

Climate PoliticsClimate Politics.............................................................................................................................................................................................1

Climate Good 1NC........................................................................................................................................................................................6

Climate Good 1NC........................................................................................................................................................................................8

2NC Impact Calc Warming Quick...............................................................................................................................................................9

Uniqueness: Will Pass Longer Version of 1NC Card.................................................................................................................................10

Uniqueness: Will Pass Bro Card for 1NR..................................................................................................................................................12

Uniqueness: Will Pass Committees .........................................................................................................................................................13

Uniqueness: Will Pass House And G8......................................................................................................................................................14

Uniqueness: Will Pass AT: Mccain............................................................................................................................................................15

Uniqueness: Will Pass Vote Count...........................................................................................................................................................16

Uniqueness: Will Pass Odds.....................................................................................................................................................................17

AT: Healthcare Prevents Climate Passage.................................................................................................................................................18

AT: Healthcare First....................................................................................................................................................................................19

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Senate .............................................................................................................................................................20

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Democrats .......................................................................................................................................................21

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Healthcare First................................................................................................................................................22

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Recession.........................................................................................................................................................24

Uniqueness: Wont Pass China ...............................................................................................................................................................25

Uniqueness: Nuclear Concessions =/= Passage........................................................................................................................................26

AT: Senate Will Use Reconciliation.............................................................................................................................................................27

Climate Bill Inevitable................................................................................................................................................................................28

Climate Bill Inevitable................................................................................................................................................................................29

I/L: Political Capital Key..............................................................................................................................................................................30

I/L: Bipartisanship Key................................................................................................................................................................................31

Cap And Trade Solves Nuclear Power........................................................................................................................................................32

Cap And Trade Solves Nuclear Power........................................................................................................................................................33

AT: Not Enough Loan Guarantees..............................................................................................................................................................34

AT: Obama Wont Push Nuclear Power......................................................................................................................................................35

AT: Nuclear Power Still Too Expensive.......................................................................................................................................................36

AT: Loan Guarantees Now..........................................................................................................................................................................37

AT: States Solve Loan Guarantees.............................................................................................................................................................38

AT: States Solve Loan Guarantees.............................................................................................................................................................40

1

Ellis, Mitchell, Teddy & Megan

8/8/2019 Climate DA

2/156


7WJ HPSWAT: Nuclear Power Bad...............................................................................................................................................................................41

AT: Nuclear Power Bad...............................................................................................................................................................................42

AT: Loan Guarantees Expensive................................................................................................................................................................43

AT: No Workforce/Manufacturing Capacity................................................................................................................................................44

Federal Government Key To Nuclear Leadership.......................................................................................................................................45

Nuclear Leadership GoodProlif (1/2).......................................................................................................................................................46

Nuclear Leadership GoodProlif (2/2).......................................................................................................................................................48

Nuclear Power GoodReprocessing (1/2).................................................................................................................................................49

Nuclear Power GoodReprocessing (2/2).................................................................................................................................................50

Nuclear Power GoodPoverty...................................................................................................................................................................51

Nuclear Power GoodWater Wars.............................................................................................................................................................52

AT: Nuclear Power Overuses Water...........................................................................................................................................................53

AT: Cap And Trade Not Kt Warming...........................................................................................................................................................54

AT: Wind Solves..........................................................................................................................................................................................56

AT: Solar Solves..........................................................................................................................................................................................57

AT: Stimulus Solves....................................................................................................................................................................................58

AT: Cap And Trade Inevitable/No Timeframe.............................................................................................................................................59

AT: Cap And Trade Inevitable/No Timeframe.............................................................................................................................................60

AT: State Cap And Trade Solves.................................................................................................................................................................61

C&T GoodExtinction................................................................................................................................................................................62

Ext. C&T Solves Warming...........................................................................................................................................................................63



Cap And Trade Modeled.............................................................................................................................................................................67




Cap and Trade Modeled.............................................................................................................................................................................71

China Key To Solve Warming.....................................................................................................................................................................72

Positive Feedbacks.....................................................................................................................................................................................73

AT: Current Emission Levels Too High.......................................................................................................................................................74

AT: G8 Solves.............................................................................................................................................................................................75

AT: Free Market Solves/Government Control Bad......................................................................................................................................76

AT: Carbon Leakage...................................................................................................................................................................................77

2


8/8/2019 Climate DA

3/156


7WJ HPSWAT: EPA Regulation Solves.........................................................................................................................................................................78

Climate Models Good.................................................................................................................................................................................79

Warming Anthropogenic............................................................................................................................................................................80

AT: Recent Events Disprove Climate Change............................................................................................................................................81

AT: Recent Events Disprove Climate Change............................................................................................................................................82

AT: Climate Change Theory Inconsistent...................................................................................................................................................83

AT: Negative Feedbacks.............................................................................................................................................................................84

AT: Solar Radiation Cuases Warming.........................................................................................................................................................85

AT: Natural Temperature Cycles................................................................................................................................................................86

AT: Satellite Data Proves No Warming.......................................................................................................................................................87

Warming BadSea Level...........................................................................................................................................................................88

Warming BadEconomy............................................................................................................................................................................89

Warming BadEnvironment......................................................................................................................................................................90

Warming BadDisease (1/2).....................................................................................................................................................................91

Warming BadDisease (2/2).....................................................................................................................................................................92

Warming BadWater Wars........................................................................................................................................................................93

Ext. Warming Causes Water Scarcity.........................................................................................................................................................94

Warming BadForests...............................................................................................................................................................................95

Warming BadSystemic Death/Poverty....................................................................................................................................................96

AT: Trade Turn............................................................................................................................................................................................97

AT: Trade Turn............................................................................................................................................................................................98

AT: Trade Turn..........................................................................................................................................................................................100

AT: WTO Checks Trade Wars....................................................................................................................................................................101

AT: C&T Kills Economy.............................................................................................................................................................................102

AT: Climate Bill Kills Economy..................................................................................................................................................................103

AT: Climate Bill Kills Economy..................................................................................................................................................................105

AT: C&T Kills Economy Auctions ...........................................................................................................................................................106

C&T GoodHegemony.............................................................................................................................................................................107

Ext. Climate Kt Leadership.......................................................................................................................................................................108

AT: Competitiveness Turn........................................................................................................................................................................110

AT: Cap And Trade Fails/Economy Turns.................................................................................................................................................111

EIA Indict (Electricity Prices)....................................................................................................................................................................112

***Climate Bad***....................................................................................................................................................................................113

Nuclear Power Decreasing.......................................................................................................................................................................114

3


8/8/2019 Climate DA

4/156


7WJ HPSWNuclear Power Bad Extincion.................................................................................................................................................................115

AT: Nuclear Power Leadership.................................................................................................................................................................116

Nuclear Power Bad Prolif ......................................................................................................................................................................117

AT: Reprocessing Solves Prolif.................................................................................................................................................................118

AT: Nuclear Power Solves Water Wars.....................................................................................................................................................119

C&T Bad Warming ................................................................................................................................................................................120

C&T Cant Solve Warming........................................................................................................................................................................121




C&T Fails Warming ...............................................................................................................................................................................127

AT: C&T Solves Warming..........................................................................................................................................................................128

AT: Sea Levels..........................................................................................................................................................................................130

AT: Disease Spread..................................................................................................................................................................................131

AT: Drought..............................................................................................................................................................................................132

AT: Forests...............................................................................................................................................................................................133

Greenhouse Theory Flawed......................................................................................................................................................................134

Climate Models Bad..................................................................................................................................................................................135

C&T Bad Economy ................................................................................................................................................................................136

Ext. C&T Kills Economy............................................................................................................................................................................138



Ext. Cant Solve Warming/Economy.........................................................................................................................................................142

AT: C&T Solves Economy.........................................................................................................................................................................143

AT: C&T Solves Economy Green Jobs....................................................................................................................................................144

2NC Trucking Industry Module.................................................................................................................................................................145

Trucking Industry Brink............................................................................................................................................................................146

Ext. Trucking Key to Economy.................................................................................................................................................................147

C&T Bad Competitiveness (1/2)............................................................................................................................................................148

C&T Bad Competitiveness (2/2)............................................................................................................................................................150

Ext. C&T Kills Competitiveness................................................................................................................................................................152

C&T Bad Free Trade...............................................................................................................................................................................154

C&T Bad Poverty ...................................................................................................................................................................................155

Healthcare Kt Climate..............................................................................................................................................................................156

4


8/8/2019 Climate DA

5/156


7WJ HPSW

5


8/8/2019 Climate DA

6/156


7WJ HPSW

Climate Good 1NC

Climate bill will pass but itll be a tough fightSamuelsohn, 7/27 (Darren, Interview with Senator John Kerry, Were Going to Get It Done,http://www.e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2174)

Yale Environment 360: I remember watching you last year in the Senate debate on the floor as [you] were voting on the Lieberman-Warner [climate] bill, working with your senators. President Bush was waiting at

that point with a veto pen. Nowyou have President Obama, who would sign a bill. Can you talk a little about the [changed]dynamics?

John Kerry:This time theres a reality to it, because the science is more compelling, because wehave a Democratic president, because we have 60 votes, because we have a responsibility to people, toCopenhagen, and the United States needs to lead. So theres a very different dynamic, and I think a lot ofcommunities have already moved I mean, the electorate is way ahead of some of our colleagues here, in terms of energy efficiency projects, other kinds of things mayors have done, some of the governors, the

state compacts in the Midwest, in the West, in the Northeast. Over half the American economy has already voluntarily put itself under mandatory [carbon] reduction schemes. So I thinkas peoplebegin to analyze the realities here, there are greater possibilities this time around. Doesnt meanits going to be easy its not, its a very complicated issue, and it will be hard fought.

Obamas political capital key passage now is vital to global action that will solve

warmingGuardian 9 (From Yale Environment 360, part of the Guardian Environment Network, 2/3,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/03/network-obama-climate-meeting-copenhagen)

Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says that emissionsmust be stabilized by 2015 and in decline by 2020. Science, in its rightful place, can tolerate no furtherdelay. For Obama, the political winds at his back are now as favorable as they will ever be.He is in aposition toseize 2009 and do three things to meet the climate challenge: properly educate the American public about climate change and the need for immediate action; exercise the full might of hisexecutive powers and regulatory discretion under the Clean Air Act to jump-start action; andspend freely from his enormous store of politicalcapital to lead the government to enact comprehensive federal climate legislation. If he does,the United States will reclaim the mantle of global leadership when it takes its seat inCopenhagen. After eight years of U.S. inaction on climate change, American leadership offers the only hope ofsuccess. Even if President Obama himself decides to attend the talks and hopefully he will his mission will fail unless he carries with him a year's worth of demonstrated results to lend weight andcredibility to the promise he made in his inaugural address to "roll back the specter of a warming planet." In Copenhagen, his inspiring oratory alone will not be sufficient; he must demonstrate how science hasbeen restored "to its rightful place" in America in strong climate regulation and law. For almost a decade, Americans have been purposefully led astray about the reality of global warming and about the positiverelationship that exists between sustainable economic prosperity and environmental stewardship.The new president must use the bully pulpit of hisoffice to provide quick and remedial education. Obama has well chosen his scientific team in John Holdren, the White House science adviser; JaneLubchenco, the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and he should empower them and other government scientists to speak loudly, unequivocally, andfrequently to the American public about the true science of climate change and the urgency of our present circumstances. The latest science only underscores the need for immediate action, given the accelerationof global ice melt, extreme weather events, dangerous feedback loops, and potentially irreversible changes.The president must also instruct his cabinet to clarify the impact of global climate change on each oftheir respective portfolios. Global warming has been crammed into a "green" box for the sake of political expediency. Instead, it must be appreciated for its cross-cutting immensity it is fundamental to nationalsecurity, global commerce, economic recovery, energy security, public health and safety, agricultural policy, land-use planning, and environmental protection.Obama must also make a prime-time, televised address to the nation about the climate crisis and the need for immediate action and U.S. global leadership. Such a speech would send a clear signal to the American

public and the political establishment and prepare them to come together with the nations of the world in Copenhagen to meet this grave challenge. Simultaneously, the president musttravel to Copenhagen with real regulatory and legislative achievements. Signs are good thatObama genuinely means business .He is talking frequently about energy and climate change, and his economic recovery package makes important commitments towardgreen jobs, clean energy, and energy efficiency $54 billion worth. This is more than a third of the $150 billion he promised over the next 10 years for clean energy investments, so if the package survives itspassage through Congress, he will be ahead of schedule on that score. By itself, though, this investment inside a trillion dollar package merely colors the economic recovery with a pale green hue. It i s not an energy

and climate plan, andObama will still face heavy regulatory and legislative lifting to turn promise into realitybefore Copenhagen. Expectations are high that he will exercise the executive authority he already has under the Clean Air Act to achieve some quick victories and put pressure on Congress to act boldly. With former EPA chief Carol Browner heading up his climateteam in the White House, Obama has tapped the talent he needs to implement a powerful regulatory strategy. As expected, the EPA's first order of climate business is already moving forward: granting a long-delayed waiver to California to allow the state to impose

more stringent auto emissions rules, which 13 other states are poised to adopt as well. Manufacturers will soon have to deliver higher mileage vehicles on an accelerated schedule. By approving the waiver after a formal review process, EPA administrator Lisa Jacksonwill guarantee steep future emissions reductions from the transportation sector, and allow the thorny bailout of Detroit to proceed without any doubt as to where the industry must head, despite currently low fuel prices. The boldness of Obama's regulatory strategy,however, really hinges upon the fate of coal-burning power plants under the Clean Air Act. Since the Supreme Court affirmed in Massachusetts v. EPA that carbon dioxide could be regulated as a pollutant under the law, it has become an open question as to howexisting coal plants and permits for new ones will now fare under the act. The EPA plainly has the right to control CO2 emissions, and the real issue is how aggressively the law will be applied. In the short term, the question of coal rests largely in Obama's hands, andhe has the authority to stop new dirty coal plants cold. He proved it his first week in office when the EPA revoked an air permit for the Big Stone II coal plant in South Dakota, pending further review. If that first signal gets amplified, it will certainly change the tone ofwhat happens with coal in Congress longer-term, where powerful lobbies have held science at bay. The president's executive action on coal will invigorate Copenhagen and bring seriousness to bilateral discussions with China, the world's coal juggernaut. At hisdirection, the Clean Air Act can jump-start climate action by speeding aggressive federal standards for building and appliance efficiency and placing limits on other carbon-intensive sources of pollution steel mills, cement plants, other heavy industries, and shipping

Coming to Copenhagen with the necessary legislative accomplishments in addition to regulatory ones will be harder still, but it is essential to Obama's success. The proposed economic recovery package has been disappointing to advocates of public transit, lightrail, and smart growth, with sparse dollars allocated to those needs. But with the federal Transportation Bill up for reauthorization in 2009, Obama has another chance to redirect land use away from highway sprawand in a low-carbon, mass-transit direction. The administration should also strengthen energy efficiency incentives and clean energy tax credits, adopt a mandatory federal renewable energy target, and increase

investment in a clean energy grid.To secure his crowning achievement, Obama must expend political capital in Congress and work with leadersthere to complete passage ofscience-based federal legislation capping greenhouse gas emissions. Thelegislation must be signed into law this year, as delay into 2010 will wreck it on the shoals of mid-term

6


8/8/2019 Climate DA

7/156


7WJ HPSWelections, a time when political courage disappears.There will not be another political opportunity as ripe asnow;nor will there be another financial context more sensitive to a strong new signal. As the global economy starts to rise from collapse, it must do so with a price on carbon as part of its cure.Thereis considerable debate about the form which a cap and a price signal should take in recent weeks acarbon tax has even been a topic of renewed discussion. None of the options is perfect, but one of them is rising as a preferred choice becauseit protects low-and middle-income families from rising energy prices. It's called "cap-and-dividend." Under this program, permits to pollute the air with greenhouse gases would be auctioned and the proceedsreturned to citizens. The extra income, which should be targeted especially to the poor, will protect the most vulnerable American families from rising energy prices and will help build a long-term constituency forclimate action. In the present economic crisis, the prospect of sending monthly dividend checks to families i s a political winner. It makes a cap-and-dividend plan largely immune from criticism that it will be costly tothe public, and it increases the chances of passage this year.Many believe it may be necessary to reserve some portion of the auction revenues for investments in clean energy programs at home and in adaptationand technology transfers abroad. Whether the allocations should be shared and what the right ratios ought to be will be the subject of intense political negotiation on Capitol Hill. Still, cap-and-dividend provides thebest point of departure because it creates a fundamental break with business-as-usual. It establishes a new, winning, cognitive frame of reference: the democratic principle that an equal share of the sky belongs toeach person. Indeed, Peter Barnes, who originally formulated this concept and has championed it tirelessly, began by asking a simple question: Who owns the sky? Without a price signal, nobody does, and globalwarming pollution will proceed essentially unchecked. With cap-and-dividend, everybody owns the sky and the emissions cap then becomes universally comprehensible as it begins to turn us toward a low-carbon

future. This American accomplishment, brought by President Obama to Copenhagen along withother concrete actions, would set the stage for passage of a comprehensiveinternational treaty to slow global warming. Now is the year fo r PresidentObama to act ,while the window of opportunity is wide open.

7


8/8/2019 Climate DA

8/156


7WJ HPSW

Climate Good 1NC

Warming guarantees multiple positive feedbacks triggering extinction adaptationcannot solve

Tickell, 8 (Oliver, Climate Researcher, The Gaurdian, On a planet 4C hotter, all we can prepare for is

extinction, 8/11http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/climatechange)

We need to get prepared for four degrees of global warming, Bob Watson told the Guardian last week. At first sight this looks like

wise counsel from the climate science adviser to Defra. But the idea that we could adapt to a 4C rise is absurdand dangerous. Global warming on this scale would be a catastrophe that would mean , in the immortal wordsthat Chief Seattle probably never spoke, "the end of living and the beginning of survival" for humankind. Or perhaps the beginningof ourextinction.The collapse of the polar ice caps would become inevitable, bringing long-termsea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities,transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland. The world's geographywould be transformed much as it was at the end of the last ice age, when sea levels rose by about 120 metres to create the Channel,the North Sea and Cardigan Bay out of dry land. Weather would become extreme and unpredictable, with more frequent and severe

droughts, floods and hurricanes.The Earth's carrying capacity would be hugely reduced. Billions wouldundoubtedly die. Watson's call was supported by the government's former chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, who warned

that "if we get to a four-degree rise it is quite possible that we would begin to see a runaway increase". This is a remarkableunderstatement.The climate system is already experiencing significant feedbacks , notably the summermelting of the Arctic sea ice.The more the ice melts, the more sunshine is absorbed by the sea, and themore the Arctic warms. And as the Arctic warms, the release of billions of tonnes of methane agreenhouse gas 70 times stronger than carbon dioxide over 20 years captured under melting permafrost is already underway. To see how far this process could go, look 55.5m years to the Palaeocene-EoceneThermal Maximum, when a globaltemperature increase of 6C coincided with the release of about 5,000 gigatonnes of carbon into the atmosphere, both as CO2 and asmethane from bogs and seabed sediments. Lush subtropical forests grew in polar regions, and sea levels rose to 100m higher thantoday. It appears that an initial warming pulse triggered other warming processes. Many scientists warn that this historical event

may be analogous to the present: the warming caused by human emissions could propel us towards asimilar hothouse Earth.

8


8/8/2019 Climate DA

9/156


7WJ HPSW

2NC Impact Calc Warming Quick

The impact is quick 81 months to extinctionGuardian Weekly, 8 (Andrew Simms, Guardian Weekly: Just 100 months left to save Earth: Andrew

Simms on a New Green Deal that could forestall the climate change tipping point, 8/15, L/N)

In just 100 months' time, if we are lucky, and based on a conservative estimate, we could reach a tipping point forthe beginnings of runaway climate change . Let us be clear exactly what we mean. The concentration of carbondioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere today, the most prevalent greenhouse gas, is the highest it has been for the past 650,000 years. In

just 250 years, as a result of the coal-fired Industrial Revolution, and changes to land use such as the growth of cities and the fellingof forests, we have released more than 1,800bn tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. Currently, approximately 1,000 tonnes of CO2are released into the atmosphere every second, due to human activity. Greenhouse gases trap incoming solar radiation, warming the

atmosphere. When these gases accumulate beyond a certain level - a "tipping point" - globalwarming will accelerate, potentially beyond control. Faced with circumstances that threaten human civilisation,scientists at least have the sense of humour to term what drives this process as "positive feedback". In climate change, anumber of feedback loops amplify warming through physical processes that are either triggered by the initial warming, or the

increase in greenhouse gases. One example is the melting of ice sheets.The loss of ice cover reduces the ability ofthe Earth's surface to reflect heat and, by revealing darker surfaces, increases the amount of heat absorbed.

Other dynamics include the decreasing ability of oceans to absorb CO2 due to higher windstrengths, linked to climate change. This has already been observed in the Southern Ocean and North Atlantic, increasing theamount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and adding to climate change. Because of such self-reinforcing feedbacks, oncea critical greenhouse concentration threshold is passed, global warming will continue even if westop releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. If that happens, the Earth's climate will shift into a more volatilestate, with different ocean circulation, wind and rainfall patterns, the implications of which are potentiallycatastrophic for life on Earth. This is often referred to as irreversible climate change. So, how do wearrive at the ticking clock of 100 months? It's possible to estimate the length of time it will take to reach a tipping point. To do so youcombine current greenhouse gas concentrations with the best estimates for the rates at which emissions are growing, the maximumconcentration of greenhouse gases allowable to forestall potentially irreversible changes to the climate system, and the effect ofthose environmental feedbacks.

9


8/8/2019 Climate DA

10/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass Longer Version of 1NC Card

Climate bill will pass and solve the economy but itll be a tough fight Obamaspolitical capital is key

Samuelsohn, 7/27 (Darren, Interview with Senator John Kerry, Were Going to Get It Done,http://www.e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2174)

Yale Environment 360: I remember watching you last year in the Senate debate on the floor as [you] were voting on the Lieberman-Warner [climate] bill, working with your senators. President Bush was waiting at

that point with a veto pen. Nowyou have President Obama, who would sign a bill. Can you talk a little about the [changed]dynamics?

John Kerry:This time theres a reality to it, because the science is more compelling, because wehave a Democratic president, because we have 60 votes, because we have a responsibility to people, toCopenhagen, and the United States needs to lead. So theres a very different dynamic, and I think a lot ofcommunities have already moved I mean, the electorate is way ahead of some of our colleagues here, in terms of energy efficiency projects, other kinds of things mayors have done, some of the governors, the

state compacts in the Midwest, in the West, in the Northeast. Over half the American economy has already voluntarily put itself under mandatory [carbon] reduction schemes. So I thinkas peoplebegin to analyze the realities here, there are greater possibilities this time around. Doesnt meanits going to be easy its not, its a very complicated issue, and it will be hard fought.e360: As an advocate without President Bush around, though, is it hard to push this?

Kerry: We dont want [to be] divisive, we dont want anything partisan out of this. Its not a partisan issueThis is an issue that ought to be based on science, on facts, on economics, and on good environmental policy good economicpolicy, may I add significantly. I mean, this bill is really a bill for the transformation of the Americaneconomy. This bill is about jobs clean energy jobs that stay here in America, that pay peopledecent salaries. It represents one of the fastest growing sectors of many of our states, including North Dakota. North Dakota, it has been determined by the[American Wind Energy] Association, is the number one potential state for wind in the country. It could produce ten thousand times its own electricity needs just from wind. So,there are many reasons for people to embrace what is going to be done here. It is an anti-pollution bill that protects children from all the impacts of bad air, and it is a huge stepforward for energy independence for our country.e360: Some say that the House bill is too weak, that it was watered down too much in the negotiations. You have the Europeans calling for stronger targets. Whats your opinion?Kerry: I introduced legislation several years ago that had higher levels of reductions. But were going to have to find a level of compromise here that works for people. I know thatthe House started at a higher level and had to move backward somewhat, but it got the votes, and were going to have to negotiate here obviously intelligently and get the

votes. I cant tell you what the level will be in the bill, because those are decisions that will be made down the road here as we get together in the next weeks. I think theHouse bill is actually a very good bill, a very strong bill, [with] enormous positive assets, andthere may be several things we feel we can tweak, make stronger. We met with Markey and Waxman, and theyencouraged us to do that if we can in various places, even gave us some ideas about things they would have liked to have done but werent able to. So the key here is to build asbroad a coalition as is possible.e360: In [the 2004 presidential] campaign, you didnt win West Virginia and Montana and the Dakotas and these states that are the swing states. Are you concerned that you might be too polarizing as a senatorrepresenting Massachusetts now?

Kerry: I really dont think so. You have to be reasonable West Virginia has huge unemployment, a lot of folks who are on the lower end of the economic income scale, and a major coal interest, and I respect that.Were trying to find a way to save the coal industry. In fact, coal has a better opportunity for its future if it comes on board this bill, because if it doesnt, its going to be regulated by the EPA, without the assistancethat were going to put in this bill to help them. So, our commitment to clean coal technology is in fact a huge incentive for coal states to recognize that this is a good moment. Again, this is l egislating, this is not acampaign, this is not a race for the presidency. This is about how do we meet those interests.e360: From a political standpoint, after every single House amendment vote that took place in the Energy and Commerce Committee, reporters e-mail inboxes were flooded with press releases from the NationalRepublican Congressional Committee attacking the House Democrats who voted on those amendments. Kerry: Well, theres a huge grassroots effort going on right now that will support the people who are involvedwith this. Al Gore, the Climate Action Partnership. Different people are raising money, hiring people involved with grassroots organizing, putting advertisements together, and theyre going to run ads in support ofpeople where they do this, and theyre also going to run ads describing this challenge appropriately in certain states to encourage people to change their mind. But theyre going to try to educate the public about itSo this will be hard fought, itll be a very big deal, itll be very tough. I have no illusions about it, I know its tough. Its taken a lot of time to try to get health care through here. And were still fighting that. But therethis is a growing recognition of a major challenge to Americans security and economic interests.e360: Republicans think they can take the House and Senate back with this vote. Ive also talked to Newt Gingrich. He says President Obama, in a run for a second term, could be in trouble because of this cap-and-trade bill. Do you think theres any truth to that?Kerry: I dont agree. This is an economic jobs bill. This is a jobs bill, we will show. We had Governor Bill Ritter from Colorado here, Governor Christine Gregoire here, two days ago, talking about how many jobs theycreated in their states as a consequence of their moves on environmental policy, and what theyre doing, and they can dispute and completely discredit any arguments that theyve lost jobs because theyre doingthose things. So as the evidence comes in, people who look at the facts are going to realize whats really happening here. You have to take risks. The Republicans, whats their plan? What plan do they have foranything? Do they have a plan for heath care? No. Do they want to fix the system? No. Their no is a vote for the status quo, and the status quo hurts Americans. Whats their energy, whats their global climatechange policy? To stick their heads in the sand and pretend it isnt happening? And risk catastrophe for our nation and the planet? I think people will recognize the importance of these issues as we go forward. Letthis debate be joined. I look forward to it.e360: At the press conference after Lieberman-Warner last year you talked about how this was one of the first times that the senators had had to grapple with the issue. Whats changed from last year to this year?Kerry: I think our colleagues are well aware of the problem and concerned about it. Theyre just trying to figure out whats the best way to try to deal with it. I think whats changed is that the science is coming back

dramatically faster and in greater affirmation of the predictions than anybody had thought, and so scientists are deeply alarmed. Thats one thing thats changed. Secondly, majorbusinesses and corporations have signed up realizing that this is critical to their economic future,and so you have DuPont and Siemens,

and various power companies, like Florida Power and Light and American Electric

Power, who believe that weve got to do this. Youve got tech companies, different kinds of entitiesall of whom believe that this is a big deal for Americas economy, that were going to create jobsthat dont go overseas, that provide a higher standard of living. I think that that realization is striking home with people. Thirdly, youvegot global climate change impacts hitting states all across the country. Less rainfall, stronger drought, fire risks, beetle pine nut bugs that are eating forests in Colorado and Montana. Things are happening to thenegative because of climate change, and local populations are perceiving those things. So I think that the public is ahead of some of the politicians in Washington on this, and weve just got to get it caught up.e360: What specifics are you going to add to the bill from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee? Kerry: I cant tell you what we will do or not do. We may just put them into the bill with [Environment and PublicWorks Committee Chairwoman] Barbara [Boxer]. We may mark it up ourselves. That decision has yet to be made. e360: Can you talk about what general issues you intend? Kerry: The kinds of things are offsets,adaptation technology transfer, potential goals for Copenhagen... e360: How much does the health care debate influence the climate debate success on health care breeds success on climate and failure on

health care could be trouble? Kerry: Well you know how this place works, any time youre successful it opens up the opportunity to go out and be successful again. Butwhen you fail atsomething it also doesnt end the opportunity to get something done. People make too much of all thatstuff.These issues are going to rise and fall based on how well they are addressed. I think this bill

10


8/8/2019 Climate DA

11/156

8/8/2019 Climate DA

12/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass Bro Card for 1NR

Cap and trade will pass the Senate because of Obamas political capital and solve forwarming but it will be a tough fight

BMI7/1/09 (Americas Oil and Gas Insights, Climate Bill To Face Tough Time In Senate)

The US House of Representatives voted 219 to 212 in favour of the 'American Clean Energy and SecurityAct' on June 26 in a hard won victory for one of President Barack Obama's key legislative policies.

The passage ofthe bill, also referred to as the Waxman-Markey Bill after its authors, will face a far toughertime in the Senate, where the upper chamber's composition makes the polarisation of regionalinterests far more pronounced.

The bill ratified by the House would create a cap-and-trade system intended to curb emissions whilecreating a market for trading pollution permits and funding investment in new energy sources. Itaims to cut fossil fuel emissions from power plants, factories, oil refineries and vehicles to 17%below 2005 levels by 2020. The bill's cap-and-trade programme allocates 85% of credits to industry without cost, with theremaining 15% to be auctioned. Revenue from the auction will be redistributed to low-income households.The Waxman-Markey Bill would also require that at least 15% of US electricity production by 2020 come from

renewable sources. Having gained approval from the lower house, the bill now passes to asceptical Senate for ratification.Senators from Midwestern and industrial states are concerned that a cap-and-trade system could raise energy costs for consumers,including farmers, while forcing US companies to comply with stricter environmental standards than their overseas competitors.Attempts to water down the bill could, however, risk the support of senators, such as Vermont independent Bernie Sanders, whosupport more stringent environmental standards.

President Obama has asked Congress to pass a bill before December's UN climate change conference inCopenhagen but gaining Senate support for the Waxman-Markey Bill will be a key test of hislegislative pull. Key members of Obama's administration, including energy secretary Steven Chu and foreign relationscommittee chairman John Kerry, have been working on securing Senate support for the bill since January. Even with Obama's supportSenate agriculture and forestry committee chairman senator Tom Harkin of Iowa said passage of the bill would be tough. Indeed, withat least six of the Senate's 20 committees working on alternative legislation, according to Bloomberg, the bill is unlikely to survive inits current form.

Further political horse-trading is inevitable, but the passage of the Waxman-Markey Bill

through the House of Representatives is a landmark victory for Obama's energy policy, which is predicatedon a transition away from dependence on fossil fuels and significant investment in renewable technologies. With Obamaclearly willing to expend significant political capital to secure the passage oflegislation which will, for the fist time, put a price on US greenhouse gas emissions, passage of a wide-rangingclimate change bill before the end of 2009 now seems assured.

12


8/8/2019 Climate DA

13/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass Committees

This years version of the bill will passall key committees support itHotakainen 7/12/2009 (Rob, Miami Herald, "Boxer faces challenge of a lifetime' on climate change bill",http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/v-print/story/1138238.html, WEA)

Last year, Boxer's standalone climate-change bill fell to defeat, but there's a new strategy thisyear that will make it harder for senators to reject it. Six committees - Environment and Public Works, whichBoxer heads, Finance, Commerce, Energy, Agriculture and Foreign Relations - will have jurisdiction over the bill.Thosecommittee heads have been meeting for months with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who'llhelp combine their work into one massive bill this fall.Boxer said the approach was unlike any she'd experienced since she joined the Senate in 1993, and she predicted that it will simplifypassage.

"It's a different dynamic, and it will make it easier," she said in the interview. "There will be so much in this bill.There will be investments in transportation. There will be great opportunities for agriculture. There will be great incentives for energyefficiency. There will be so much in there. There will be help for areas that need flood control. It should have a broader appeal. Havingsaid that, it's all difficult."While vote counts vary, most observers say the bill's fate will lie with 15 or so Democratic moderates, many of whom fear that a vote

for climate change legislation could hurt their re-election chances. Boxer is trying to round up some Republican

votes to offset opposition from the likes of Democratic Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Ben Nelson ofNebraska.Boxer has been telling audiences for years that Congress must act, and that it will. After years of battling with the Bushadministration, Boxer figures she has the best odds ever of getting a bill signed into law.

13


8/8/2019 Climate DA

14/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass House And G8

We control momentumHouse passage and G8 meeting.Bishu 7/17/2009 (Deswta, Ethiopian Review, "House Passes Landmark Climate Change Bill, Now Heads to Senate",http://www.ethiopianreview.com/articles/14962, WEA)

The U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed a sweeping climate changebill today that will significantly changethe way Americans use and produce energy.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), which passed on a 219-212 vote, now moves to the Senate, whereexperts predict another battle.

Environmental groups hailed the bill's passing."This vote was a major hurdle, and we've cleared it," Kevin Knobloch, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a

prepared statement. "President Obama can walk into the G8 summit of world leaders in Italy next weekwith his head held high. Now we have momentum to move and improve legislation in the Senateand put it on President Obama's desk so he can go to December's international summit in Copenhagen with the full backingof the Congress and the American people."Before the vote, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told her colleagues "we cannot hold back the future." She offered four words that shesaid represent the meaning of the legislation."Jobs, jobs, jobs and jobs," she said.

14


8/8/2019 Climate DA

15/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass AT: Mccain

McCain will give in despite his frustration over the bill.Yarow 7/16/2009 - economics degree at University of Delaware and master's in journalism from NYU (Jay, The BusinessInsider, "What Will John McCain Do With The Climate Bill?", http://www.businessinsider.com/what-will-john-mccain-do-with-the-

climate-bill-2009-7, WEA)

With the cap and trade bill sitting in the Senate awaiting proper debate, E&E Daily takes a very long look at John McCain's record onclimate trade and tries to come up with an idea about how he'll vote.

Until Waxman and Markey put their names on the front page of the climate bill, McCaindominated any discussions about cap and trade legislation. He's tried introducing the legislationthree different times and each time he's been shot down, pretty handily.Now that there's a piece of legislation with some popular support, some momentum, surely he's happy? Well, not really.

And try as they might E&E can't really provide much insight as to how McCain will vote. They'vegot Republican Senator George Voinovich implying that McCain would vote against thebill because he knows it will hurt Americans. Opposing that point of view is John McCainhimself, sort of:

In contrast with GOP comments during last month's House debate, McCain argued that a cap-and-trade bill would work during the country's historic recession, citing the economicopportunities from a climate bill and questioning modelers who do not considertechnological innovation and other ways to lower the policy's costs. He also held firm inhis opposition to a "safety valve" limit on price limits, a point environmentalists saywould stymie development of low-carbon energy sources.

And McCain trumpeted the science, citing congressional delegation trips he had led to Antarcticathe North Pole and Alaska.

Our reading of the article: John McCain thinks the bill has a lot of crap in it (who doesn't?) but when pushcomes to shove, he'll exercise his influence on the debate, shape it so he's happy, hold his noseand vote yes.

15


8/8/2019 Climate DA

16/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass Vote Count

Nate Silver says itll get to 60 votes but it will be a close callYarow, 7/6/09 (Jay, The Business Insider, Nate Silver: Enough Votes In The Senate To Pass The Climate Bill)

Political wonk and stats guru, Nate Silver says there's enough yes votes available inthe Senate to get the climate bill passed but there will be probably be more compromises.After the House approved the climate bill, Silver created a regression model to determine how aRepresentative would vote. His model was pretty accurate, so he applied it to the Senate tosee how it will vote. The model factors in ideology, partisan nature of a state, carbonemissions per capita, poverty, lobbying and employment in carbon intensiveindustries.Overall, Silver's analysis finds there are 52 voters likely to be in favor of the bill, but thinks thereare 62-66 votes up for grabs. Here's the breakdown:* Silver sees 44 highly likely yes votes, all Democrats, and 34 highly likely no votes, all Republicans.* In the middle there are 6 democrats that Silver deems "likely" yes votes. That would be 50 yes votes, enough for Biden to cast adeciding vote in favor of the legislation.* There are 3 more "possibly maybe" votes from Mark Begich (D-AK), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Susan Collins (R-ME) putting the

total yes votes at 53.* There are 9 "problematic Democrats" that include: Evan Bayh (D-IN), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Mary Landireu (D-LA), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), Kent Conrad (D-ND), and Ben Nelson (D-NE). These folks canexpect calls from Rahm Emmanuel as the vote draws near.* There's four long shot Republicans: John McCain (R-AZ), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Mel Martinez (R-FL), and Chuck Grassley (R-IA).

While this should be assuring to any climate bill supporter, the real number that matters in the whole debate is 60.That's the number needed to bring the bill to vote and shut off filibustering. On major pieces of legislation, like the climate bill, Silversays the votes in favor of the bill usually fall in line with the votes against filibustering.

So, the bill isn't a slam dunk. There's going to be lots of compromising to get from 53 possiblyapproving Senators into 60 Senators definitely willing to have a vote on the bill. Once the bill isput to a vote, it looks likely it will be approved, unless the compromises kill the bill. As Silver puts it, "Thequestion is how many ornaments the Democrats could place on the Christmas Tree before it starts to collapse under its own weight.

Climate bill will pass with compromises Nate Silvers statistical analysis proves

Doremus, 7/7/09 (Holly, Legal Planet: The Environmental Law and Policy Blog, Forecasting climate votes in the Senate)Nate Silver, the statistician who gained prominence in the last election cycle with his predictions for the presidential race, hasmodeled the prospects of the Waxman-Markey climate bill in the Senate. The analysis is necessarily basedon a number of assumptions, such as that the bill doesnt change in its progress to the Senate floor. So its an artificial exercise, butan interesting one.

Silvers model finds 51 votes with a reasonably high probability (75% or higher) of voting infavor of the bill (thats not how Silver divides up the probabilities, but theres a clear split in his model between Mark Begich ofAlaska (77.98%) and the next highest Senator, Olympia Snowe of Maine (55.13%)).That would be barely enough topass the bill, but not nearly enough to break a threatened filibuster. Silver sees 9 problematic votes in theDemocratic caucus and only 2 Republicans (Snowe and Collins of Maine) with a double-digit probability of breaking ranks with theirparty.

Overall, this is a slightly better assessment than I expected. Although the model considers only52 Senators to be more likely than not to vote for the bill, there are somewhere between 62-66 votes that are perhaps potentially in play. But . . . further compromises would almostcertainly be needed, some of them designed to placate as few as one senator.The question is howmany ornaments the Democrats could place on the Christmas Tree before it starts to collapse under its own weight.

16


8/8/2019 Climate DA

17/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Will Pass Odds

Climate bill has better than even chances of passingCappiello, 7/27/09 (Dina Cappiello, San Francisco Examiner, AP Interview: Lieberman, despite past

rifts with Dems, still fights for global warming law,

http://www.sfexaminer.com/politics/ap/51807187.html)

Lieberman still thinks that cap-and-trade is the best way to control global warming emissions. He also says it would raise the moneyneeded to make "revolutionary investments" in cleaner forms of energy, and to "ameliorate some of the pain associated with anenormous societal change" in how Americans power their homes, vehicles and businesses. "That's the thing I like most and why

feel comfortable operating in the context of the House bill," he said. This year, however, Lieberman says the odds forpassage "are better than even" thanks to a president who is behind the bill, the House passingglobal warming legislation for the first time and a looming December deadline for internationaltalks on a new treaty to reduce heat-trapping gases. The science, he said, also has gottenmore compelling since he wrote his first global warming bill more than a decade ago. "Every year theproblem gets worse, the threat of real damage gets worse, even catastrophic damage," said Lieberman, sounding like his 2000presidential running mate, Vice President Al Gore, who went on to win a Nobel Prize for his work on global warming.

17


8/8/2019 Climate DA

18/156


7WJ HPSW

AT: Healthcare Prevents Climate Passage

Obama doesnt have a one-track mindpushing healthcare doesnt rule out progresson climate.

WSJ 7/23/2009 (Wall Street Journal, "Team Obama: why farmers should love the climate bill",

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/07/23/team-obama-why-farmers-should-love-the-climate-bill/tab/print/, WEA)

The fact that President Obama focused on health care to the near-total exclusion ofhis energy and climatepush in his press conference last night has some folks wondering: Should we get over ourselves and concede that healthcare takes priority over climate action?

Not so fast. The Obama administration continued its offensive on the climate bill, but from a differentquartertrying to assuage the fears ofthe all-important farm-state senators who can make or break theclimate push in the Senate.A number of administration heavyweightsAgriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, EPA administrator Lisa

Jackson, and science advisor John Holdrentold the Senate Agriculture Committee to relax. Farmers will make out alot better with climate legislation than without it, enjoying significant net benefits.Secretary Vilsack brandished a new report from the Agriculture Department. The upshot? Thanks to all the last-minute goodiesincluded in the House climate bill, farmers stand to rake in a fortune from so-called carbon offsets. That extra income will more thancompensate higher energy prices, he said.

Still on track for climate passage Senators can walk and chew gum at the same timeSamuelsohn, 7/23/2009 (Darren, senior reporter, Senate health care delay won't change cap-and-trade schedule, Demssay, E&E News, Lexis)

Top Senate Democrats insisted today that their plans for moving a global warming bill this fallwill not slip despite delays on President Obama's health care reform package. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.)today acknowledged that the Senate would not begin floor debate until after the August recess on health care legislation. But that

shift in schedule does not affect Reid's Sept. 28 deadline for six Senate committees to completetheir pieces of a climate bill, according to his spokesman, Jim Manley. "Not aware of any change," Manley said of the Sept.28 target. Reid had previously wanted to pass the health care bill before the summer break and then return in September to start aconference with the House. That schedule was abandoned after House and Senate Democrats struggled this week to find consensusin several committees. For now, Reid's goal is to resolve health care differences in the key committees in time for a September floor

debate, alongside several fiscal 2010 appropriations bills. And Senate Democrats still expect to meet Reid's timetable for the globalwarming bill. "I think the idea of marking up in late September is viable, and something we ought todo," said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), who sits on both the Environment and Public Works and Finance committees. "And we maybe doing that, literally, while we're debating on the floor health care legislation. But we can walkand chew gum. Mostly." An aide to EPW Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) confirmed that the plan still remains forcommittee action in September. And Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said he planned to meet Reid's deadline for movinghis parts of the climate bill.

Baucus agrees theyll get climate done in SeptemberSamuelsohn, 7/28/2009 (Darren, senior reporter, Baucus pledges to meet late Sept. deadline for cap and trade, E&ENews, Lexis)

Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) will meet a late September deadline for clearing global

warming legislation despite the all-out push for a health care bill that has dominated thecongressional agenda, he said today. "Yes, we'll meet it," Baucus said of the Sept. 28 target that Majority Leader Harry Reid(D-Nev.) has set for six committees to sign off on their pieces of a sweeping climate bill. More than any other lawmaker, Baucus hasbeen engulfed in negotiations on health care reform, with prospects for Senate success resting in large part on a small set of

bipartisan negotiations he is leading in the Finance Committee. At the same time, Baucus said he is gearing up forSeptember, when he will also be tackling some of the core pieces of a climate bill, including thedistribution of hundreds of millions of dollars in emission allowances, as well as provisionsdealing with international trade. "We're going to, in the Finance Committee, have hearings on and fully intend to mark upallowances, which allowances are free allowances, as well as what allowances are auctioned," Baucus told E&E. "We'll be taking thatup."

18


8/8/2019 Climate DA

19/156


7WJ HPSW

AT: Healthcare First

The vote will come soon despite the push for health careSamuelsohn, 7/28/09, (Darren, E&E News PM, CLIMATE: Baucus pledges to meet late Sept. deadline for cap and trade)

Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) will meet a late September deadline forclearing global warming legislation despite the all-out push for a health care bill that has dominatedthe congressional agenda, he said today."Yes, we'll meet it," Baucus said of the Sept. 28 target that Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has set for six committees to sign offon their pieces of a sweeping climate bill.

More than any other lawmaker, Baucus has been engulfed in negotiations on health care reform,with prospects for Senate success resting in large part on a small set of bipartisan negotiations he is leading in the FinanceCommittee.

At the same time, Baucus said he is gearing up for September, when he will also be tacklingsome of the core pieces of a climate bill, including the distribution of hundreds of millions of dollars inemission allowances, as well as provisions dealing with international trade.

Obama is still lobbying Congress on a daily basis for climate

GLG 7/27/2009 (Gerson Lehrman Group, Cap and Trade Enactment Likelihood Fading; Utilities Shouldnt GetComplacent, http://www.glgroup.com/News/Cap-and-Trade-Enactment-Likelihood-Fading-Utilities-Shouldnt-Get-Complacent-41899.html)

Administration officials and environmental groups continue to push Congress for quick action ,however.The White House is actively lobbying Congress for climate change legislation on an almostdaily basis. The administration is also working through the Environmental Protection Agency on a parallel strategy. Earlier thisyear, EPA issued an Endangerment Finding that greenhouse gas emissions constitute a threat to human health thereby enablingEPA to develop regulations under the Clean Air Act with no further action by Congress. Implementation of such regulations would nodoubt be delayed by years of litigation by industry, but the development of such regulations keeps the heat on industry and Congressto come to a legislative solution.

19


8/8/2019 Climate DA

20/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Senate

The Senate will be substantially harder than the House.Dlouhy 7/11/2009 (Jennifer A., Houston Chronicle, "Energy-climate overhaul an uphill battle in Congress",http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6524623.html, WEA)

Where the House membership is distributed by population with delegations from green-friendlyCalifornia and New York having 82 members the Senate's equal distribution of seats means thatcoal-reliant Ohio has the same voting power as California.Regional issues tend to blow up in the Senate, observed Frank Maisano, a Washington-based energy specialistwith Bracewell & Giuliani. For supporters, the largest problem is the regional nature of the debate.

20


8/8/2019 Climate DA

21/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Democrats

Wont passno Democratic unity.SFC 7/12/2009 (San Francisco Chronicle, "Climate-change challenge shifts to the U.S. Senate", http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/12/ED5618I1CC.DTL&type=printable, WEA)

Obama hailed the package, but it's nowhere near a done deal. Collecting the 60 votes the Senate willneed to stop a filibuster and win passage is no certainty. For all of its lofty intentions, the House bill was larded with so manygiveaways and complexities that several environmental groups denounced it.Adding to the bewilderment is the political reality that climate change doesn't necessarily followpartisan lines. Midwest states worry about job losses if smokestack rules change. Coal states fearthat generating plants will cut back on their favorite fuel. Farm groups want ag-friendly sweeteners topromote biofuels and allow the sale of pollution credits to outside industries. The moribund nuclear industry wants a chance torebound. Included in the House version is a tariff on imports from countries that don't play by the U.S. rules, a worrisome invitation to

a protectionist trade war.The present Democratic majority doesn't stick together on global warmingpolicy.

Supermajority isnt enough to get it through Senate.Garber 7/10/2009 (Kent, US News & World Report, "Climate change bill faces hurdles in the senate",http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/energy/2009/07/10/climate-change-bill-faces-hurdles-in-the-senate.html, WEA)

But the Senate presents special challenges. "Because there is such an overwhelming Democraticmajority in the House, you could more or less enact the bill almost entirely on Democratic votes," saysNikki Roy, who monitors Congress for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. "That's not remotely an option in theSenate, because you have to look beneath the partisan levels."Roy counts at least nine Senate Republicans who have expressed some support for tackling climate change and more than 20Senate Democrats from manufacturing or oil-producing states who worry about how the emissionslimits would affect their state's industries. "These Democrats will have a hard time voting for this unless they see theRepublicans in a serious bipartisan engagement," says Roy.

21


8/8/2019 Climate DA

22/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Healthcare First

Healthcare coverage is pushing climate off the agenda.Walsh 7/23/2009 - founder of EnergyWorks Community Relations, founder of LinkedIn, Suffolk University Law School (Joe,Red Green and Blue - environmental politics news site, "Three Ways Obama Wins Republicans on Climate Change",http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/07/23/three-ways-obama-wins-republicans-on-climate-change/, WEA)

Energy didnt get a sniff inlast nights Obama press conference. That wasnt really a surprise given the way thathealth care has elbowed its way into the political spotlight. You can count climate change amongthe priorities now in the shadows. Health care is all touch-and-feelit plays with everyone.Climate change? Not so much. If Jon Stewart is snoozing, we know that the rest of America - a goodly percentage of which is faracross the spectrum from Stewart and outwardly hostile to climate change arguments - is tuned all the way out. That is partly

because climate change, energy and the environment still are considered Birkenstock and granolaissues. The Obama operatives that are still engaged on climate change have finally started to tweak themessage in a way that might help sell a bill even to science skeptics and the generally apathetic.Messaging is a start, but they will also need to tweak the policy. After all his arm-twisting on the F-22s,Sotomayor, health care, and the stimulus, Obama has precious little political capital to bring reluctant Senate Blue DogDems or GOPs over to support of comprehensive climate change legislation (whether one can put the husk of Waxman-Markey that passed the House in that category is another question).

With no soft power left, Obama will need to combine a new message with new concessions, and this is his best formula:Make the National Security Case for Energy Reform

Climate change efforts are being put offhealthcare is a higher priority.Palmer 7/11/2009 (Avery, CQ Politics, "Health bill now, climate change later", WEA)

At least for now, health care is the top priority for leaders on Capitol Hill and the bills intended to dealwith climate change will have to wait.Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer , D-Calif., said this week that she no longerintends to move an energy bill out of committee before the Senate leaves for its summer recessAug. 7. Instead, she said, the committee will debate amendments and vote on a bill in early September. Several senators said theyneed the extra month to negotiate with moderates in both parties to reach agreement on a large and complicated bill. And they said

the time demands of health care legislation need to be taken into account.Health care swallows up everything else for a while, said Sherrod Brown , D-Ohio. Although the committees can

still move on energy, he said, I think in terms of floor time, the health care bills going toconsume our attentions and our passion.Health care is a huge, complicated issue and critical that it be done, and so is climate change, added Debbie Stabenow , D-Mich.Many of us are deeply involved in both, so at some point, you have to decide what were going to focus on.Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nev., has agreed to extend by 10 days a deadline for all committees to finish their work on the climatechange bill, giving them until Sept. 28.

Climate bill got delayed.Goldenberg 7/9/2009 - US environment correspondent for the Guardian (Suzanne, the Guardian, "Senate Democrats push backdeadline on Obama climate change agenda", http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/09/congress-climate-change/print, WEA)

Barack Obama hit a snag in his ambitious climate change agenda today when Senate Democrats pushedback their deadline to product a draft bill until September.

Barbara Boxer, the chair of the environment and public works committee who is spearheading the Obama environment agenda,said she had scaled back plans of writing a first draft of a climate change bill before Congressgoes on its August recess."We will do it as soon as we get back," she told reporters.

She insisted that the delay would not jeopardise chances of getting climate change legislation through Congress this year. But themove comes amid signs of rising opposition to the bill in the Senate from moderate Democratsas well as Republicans.Boxer would not guarantee that Congress would be able to pass legislation before December,when Obama is due to attend an international summit on climate change at Copenhagen."I want to take this as far as we can take it," she said. "The more we can do the better."

22


8/8/2019 Climate DA

23/156


7WJ HPSWThe downshifting in the Democrats' agenda comes a day after a meeting of Obama's energy and climate change team at the WhiteHouse, and marks an acknowledgement by the Administration of the daunting challenge of getting enough votes for the bill in thedelicately balanced Senate. Boxer tried and failed a year ago to pass a climate change bill.

23


8/8/2019 Climate DA

24/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Wont Pass Recession

Cap and trade wont passrecession makes it too unpopular.Norington 7/25/2009 (Brad, the Australian, "Popular faith in Obama dwindles amid setbacks",http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25830885-7583,00.html, WEA)

He also predicts the heart of Obama's climate change plan on carbon emissions -- a cap-and-trade scheme -- could gomissing from legislation that ultimately passes in the Senate."I think the President had a terrific vision and grand plans on where to go with health and climate change, and if we were notleftwith this budget deficit and the recession was not as deep, it might have worked out," Cook tells TheWeekend Australian.

"He can look to getting a third to a half of what he wanted, rather than 60, 70, or 80 per cent.The challenge as a moststrategically gifted politician is selling a disappointing result as a victory: we've made a down payment, health andclimate change as a journey, not a destination."Obama, meanwhile, is trying to brush off suggestions of setback, saying it is OK with him to delay considering health care until theend of the year.

Obama cannot escape the realities of the US economy. But if his health and climate change policiesdon't work, he may have to tread that well-worn path of US presidents whose domestic fortuneswane: concentrate on foreign policy and hope for peace in the Middle East.

24


8/8/2019 Climate DA

25/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Wont Pass China

China is refusing to cooperate on climatethis undermines support for the Senatebill.

Rushing 7/11/2009 (J. Taylor, the Hill, "Climate bill takes hit in Senate from China", http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/climate-bill-takes-hit-in-senate-from-china-2009-07-11.html, WEA)

The refusal of China and other emerging economic powers to agree to emissions limits this week willmake it tougher for key Senate Democrats to support a global warming bill.Both Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) say they are skeptical of the climatechange bill that passed the House last month. The legislation has an uncertain future in the Senate, and Environmentand Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) announced on Thursday that she is delaying the bill until after theAugust recess.Brown, Lincoln and other Democrats say the reluctance of China and India to agree to emission restrictions clearlycomplicates the partys effort to pass the bill, given the likelihood that Republicans will lock down against it. Brownsaid it will naturally be difficult to persuade the public to support a bill that could increase costs for businesses if theres afear competition in China will gain an advantage.

25


8/8/2019 Climate DA

26/156


7WJ HPSW

Uniqueness: Nuclear Concessions =/= Passage

Nuclear powe

Documents

Climate DA