A Greenpeace & GOP Alliance?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


As noted earlier, I am filling in for Kevin for a few days. He’ll be back on Tuesday.

As the House gets closer today to a vote on the cap and trade climate change bill—or as President Barack Obama calls it, the energy jobs bill—Republican opponents of the legislation are finding cover from what is for them an unlikely source: Greenpeace. This morning, the office of House minority whip Eric Cantor sent to reporters an email containing a press release from Greenpeace that urges a vote against the measure:

Since the Waxman-Markey bill left the Energy and Commerce committee, yet another fleet of industry lobbysists has weakened the bill even more, and further widened the gap between what Waxman-Markey does and what science demands. As a result, Greenpeace opposes this bill in its current form. We are calling upon Congress to vote against this bill unless substantial measures are taken to strengthen it. Despite President Obama’s assurance that he would enact strong, science-based legislation, we are now watching him put his full support behind a bill that chooses politics over science, elevates industry interests over national interest, and shows the significant limitations of what this Congress believes is possible.

As it comes to the floor, the Waxman-Markey bill sets emission reduction targets far lower than science demands, then undermines even those targets with massive offsets. The giveaways and preferences in the bill will actually spur a new generation of nuclear and coal-fired power plants to the detriment of real energy solutions. To support such a bill is to abandon the real leadership that is called for at this pivotal moment in history.  We simply no longer have the time for legislation this weak.

Of this, a spinner for Cantor says: “Didn’t see this one coming… Greenpeace urges Congress to vote against Waxman-Markey.  Who is it that actually likes this bill?”

Of course, Cantor and other Republican foes of the legislation do not share any of Greenpeace’s arguments. They’re not upset about industry lobbyists weakening the measure. They’re not offended by the give-aways to polluters. They’re not worried that the bill doesn’t reduce emissions to the levels called for by scientists. Nor are they aware that there has long been a debate within the enviro community about the merits of this bill and the entire cap and trade approach. They just see a cheap and easy talking point, and even though House Dems are unlikely to bring the bill to a vote if they don’t have a majority, the GOPers smell blood.

******

I don’t have much to say about Michael Jackson’s death. As I Twittered yesterday, I recall an 1980s parody of The New York Post that had a front page that went something like this: “NUCLEAR WAR. Millions Dead. Including Michael Jackson.” The media obsession with Michael Jackson that the parodists were poking at back then has been much evident in the past 24 hours. Cable dumped all news of Iran, the cap and trade bill, Farrah Fawcett, Iraq, and everything else. This morning, cable news networks did cut to the proceedings of the House of Representatives: to show Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. calling for a moment of silence for Jackson. One person, no doubt, didn’t object to the uber-coverage: Governor Mark Sanford.

Which reminds me. Before MJ’s demise, I heard a cable news anchor describe the Sanford story as a “sex scandal.” I beg to differ. Read his emails. It’s a “love scandal.”

You can follow David Corn’s postings and media appearances via Twitter.

TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and it's truly crunch time: About 15 percent of our yearly online giving usually comes in during the final week of the year, and in "No Cute Headlines or Manipulative BS," we explain why we simply can't afford to come up short right now.

The bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. And advertising or profit-driven ownership groups will never make time-intensive, in-depth reporting viable.

That's why donations big and small make up 74 percent of our budget this year. There is no backup to keep us going, no alternate revenue source, no secret benefactor. If readers don’t donate, we won’t be here. It's that simple.

And if you can help us out with a donation right now, all online gifts will be matched thanks to an incredibly generous matching gift pledge.

payment methods

TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and it's truly crunch time: About 15 percent of our yearly online giving usually comes in during the final week of the year, and in "No Cute Headlines or Manipulative BS," we explain why we simply can't afford to come up short right now.

The bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. And advertising or profit-driven ownership groups will never make time-intensive, in-depth reporting viable.

That's why donations big and small make up 74 percent of our budget this year. There is no backup to keep us going, no alternate revenue source, no secret benefactor. If readers don’t donate, we won’t be here. It's that simple.

And if you can help us out with a donation right now, all online gifts will be matched thanks to an incredibly generous matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate