Or will they...?

I was thinking the cap and trade bill was so onerous and rife with bad horse trading that even Carol would avoid mentioning her own complicity in the largest tax every perpetrated.  But I was wrong. Carol has a nice Press release on the "Energy Bill," in which she says the following.

“This bill represents fundamental changes in our nation’s energy policy that are long overdue,” said Congresswoman Shea-Porter. “We cannot continue to deny the impact climate change is having on our environment and must act now to reduce global warming. In doing so, this bill will also create millions of new clean energy jobs, strengthen our national security, and protect our environment.”

The American Clean Energy and Security Act will significantly reduce dangerous pollution by limiting emissions from electric utilities, oil refineries, and other major sources. It also promotes all forms of American clean energy, including wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass. It supports private investment in nuclear power, cleaner coal technology, and new efficient American vehicle technology. The legislation also creates an opportunity for farmers and ranchers, allowing them to earn carbon offsets in exchange for planting trees, preserving existing forests, practicing sustainable farming methods, and other stewardship activities.

Well. The fundamental changes part is right, but everything after that is the stuff that comes out the back side of the bull.

Let us parse.

“We cannot continue to deny the impact climate change is having on our environment and must act now to reduce global warming. In doing so, this bill will also create millions of new clean energy jobs, strengthen our national security, and protect our environment.”

We will actually make the environment worse by driving commerce and industry to countries like India and China that have miserable environmental controls but cheap energy.  So if you believe in AGW this is a big loser.  Even global pollution will suffer long term.  And there are no net increases in green jobs as proven by Spain, most of Europe, and the destruction and loss of local jobs in excess of any number of green jobs created.

And since we get most of our foreign oil from Canada and Mexico, (no one really talks much about evil Canada) even a slight unpick in cheap, reliable, available (American job creating) domestic production would begin to leverage out unpleasant suppliers as we developed cheap reliable alternatives.

"...will significantly reduce dangerous pollution by limiting emissions from electric utilities, oil refineries, and other major sources. It also promotes all forms of American clean energy, including wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass. "

Still "no" for the same reasons noted above. And it forces more expensive alternatives by government mandate.

It supports private investment in nuclear power, cleaner coal technology, and new efficient American vehicle technology.

I'm sorry, congresswoman but why do we need a 1200 page bill to support private investment? That actually happens on its own.   So the only way to legislate 'support' is to either finance it, regulate it, or pick the winners and losers. So which is it exactly that you supported?

The legislation also creates an opportunity for farmers and ranchers, allowing them to earn carbon offsets in exchange for planting trees, preserving existing forests, practicing sustainable farming methods, and other stewardship activities.

Well..It's actually written like a subsidy that allows the Farm lobby to suck on the federal teat of cap and trade so their cows can keep farting.  Carol must think animal farts are a new global problem--I guess prior to the industrial revolution animals never farted.  So to fix this the government forces energy prices up, takes a share, and then gives some of it to commercial farmers who already make significanlty more than the average American, to plant stuff that will offset--cow farts.

Lord knows they have zero incentive to be good stewards of their livlihood without Carol and a 1200 page House Bill.

Thanks Carol.

Maybe next time Carol, you can read the bill instead of the Pelosi-digest Condensed talking points memo.   And if for, some reason, you don't actually have time, or don't understand something in the bill, instead of assuming its good for New Hampshire vote against it, even as a matter of principle.

You have that, yes?  Principles?