Obama: Senate Might Drop Carbon Cap

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


Did Obama endorse a Plan B approach to passing legislation on climate and energy this year? Well, if he didn’t outright support the idea of moving an energy bill without a cap on carbon pollution, as some moderate Democrats are calling for, he did acknowledge that it might well be what happens in the Senate.

TPM reports that at a town hall meeting in Nashua, N.H. today, Obama said that limits on carbon pollution remain the “most controversial aspects of the energy debate,” and that the Senate may move forward with an energy-only bill this year, rather than a comprehensive bill that also includes a cap on carbon dioxide emissions. Some in Congress, he said, are saying, “let’s do the fun stuff before we do the hard stuff.”

“We may be able to separate these things out, and it’s conceivable that that’s where the Senate ends up,” he said, “but the concept of incentivizing clean energy so that it’s the cheaper more effective kind of energy is one that is proven to work and is actually a market-based approach.”

Now, Obama didn’t endorse the idea of an energy-only bill. But he also didn’t he use the opportunity to make a clear, full-throated affirmation of why the cap is a crucial part of a bill. I would argue that “incentivizing” clean energy and making it cost-competitive necessarily requires a cap, but Obama could have made that a whole lot clearer today. Instead, he seems to be caving to the demands of the Senate’s most conservative Democrats on this issue.

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