Senate Democrats on Tuesday punted their oil spill response bill to next month, but the extra time doesn’t guarantee the measure will pass — far from it.

The delay virtually ensures that strategists from both parties will use the congressional recess to hone their plans, talking points and poison-pill amendments for any floor debate, all with an eye toward the midterm elections.

Majority Leader Harry Reid’s decision to pull the plug on offshore drilling is the latest blow to Democratic efforts to move energy legislation, beginning with the deaths of a sweeping climate change bill and then a scaled-down renewable energy bill.

Some Democrats and environmentalists said they are optimistic the extra time will allow them to revisit the broader renewable energy provisions they had to jettison earlier, in hopes of folding them into the drilling bill.

But lobbyists and staffers close to the energy bill process said that, if anything, the partisan dynamics that led Reid to pull the bill this week will only get worse the closer lawmakers come to the midterm elections.

“Reid has got to craft a very narrow bill. He’s going to have to go as narrow as possible,” said a former Senate Democratic aide now closely involved in the Hill energy debate. “Getting broader just makes it harder. He’s going to have to go as narrow as possible, given that he’s got some Democrats against the liability cap. It’s a terrible box.”

“Sen. Reid is predictably blaming Republicans for standing in the way of a bill that he threw together in secret and without input from almost any other member of the Senate,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. “Process alone guaranteed its failure, although substance would have as well had Sen. Reid actually brought his bill up for debate or a vote.”

New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez, the author of the language lifting the liability cap and the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, sounded a partisan message about the stalled bill, outlining the talking points Democratic strategists had prepared to use in August campaigns after the spill vote.

“The key question is, Whose side are you on? … Are you on the side of Big Oil, or are you on the side of citizens in coastal communities?” Menendez said. “I hope citizens spend the month of August asking Republicans why they oppose holding BP accountable.”

read full article

By DINA CAPPIELLO and ERIC CARVIN – 3 days ago

Cap-and-trade? Offsets? Pollution credits? The climate bill under consideration in the House tackles global warming with new limits on pollution and a market-based approach to encourage more environmentally friendly business practices. But what exactly do the proposed rules mean, and how would they work?

Some questions and answers about the bill — a top legislative priority for President Barack Obama:

Q: What’s the purpose of this legislation?

A: To reduce the gases linked to global warming and to force sources for power to shift away from fossil fuels, which when burned, release heat-trapping gases, and toward cleaner sources of energy such as wind, solar and geothermal.

Q: How does the bill accomplish this?

A: By placing the first nationwide limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases from major sources like power plants, refineries and factories. This limit effectively puts a price on the pollution, raising the cost for companies to continue to use fuels and electricity sources that contribute to global warming. This gives them an incentive to seek cleaner alternatives.

Q: Is this the “cap-and-trade” idea that’s been in the news?

A: Yes. The first step in a cap-and-trade program sets a limit on the amount of gases that can be released into the atmosphere. That’s the cap. Companies with facilities that are covered by the cap will then receive permits for their share of the pollution — an annual pollution allowance. This bill would initially give the bulk of the permits away for free to help ease costs, but they still will have value because there will be a limited supply. Companies that don’t get a big enough allowance to cover their pollution will either have to find ways to reduce it — which can be expensive — or buy additional permits from companies that have reduced pollution enough to have allowances left over. That’s the trade. Companies will typically pick the cheaper option — reducing pollution, or buying permits. They also have a third choice: They can invest in pollution reductions made elsewhere, such as at farms that capture methane or plant trees. These are known as offsets.

read full article