-Caveat Lector- ISSUE: The US Senate is scheduled to vote on the Climate Stewardship Act (S.139) at the end of the week. This piece of legislation, co-sponsored by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT), is likely to be the only vote on a comprehensive effort to reduce heat-trapping gas emissions during the current congressional session.
ACTION: Call, Fax, or Email your Senator ****************************************** *** THE ISSUE *** The Climate Stewardship Act (CSA), S -139, was introduced to the Senate by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) on January 9, 2003 and is expected to come to the Senate floor for a vote this Thursday, October 30 (although, of course, these types of deadlines are always subject to change). This bi-partisan legislation sets a firm, enforceable limit on emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and five other heat- trapping gases from the electrical power, industrial, and transportation sectors. In order to encourage the discovery and use of lowest-cost ways to cut such emissions, the limit applies to total emissions from major sources in all three sectors together, rather than from individual companies within them. The overall limits the bill sets are 2000 emission levels by 2010. The bill is an example of "cap and trade" legislation because it sets an overall limit, or "cap," on combined pollution from a set of companies while allowing the individual businesses within it to buy and sell emissions reductions from each other. This cap and trade approach to reducing heat-trapping gas emissions is flexible and market-based, and stands in sharp contrast to the Bush administration's climate plan, which is a voluntary, business-as-usual approach that will result in unabated emissions of carbon and other heat-trapping gas emissions. While it will be difficult for the CSA to prevail in this vote, a good showing would accomplish several important goals: First, it would strongly position the CSA for rapid progress in the future. Second, it would forever eliminate the widely touted but inaccurate notion that the Senate is unanimously opposed to setting limits on heat-trapping gas emissions. Finally, it would directly challenge the Bush administration's "too little, too late" policy of waiting until 2012, when this administration is out of office, to consider moving beyond voluntary-only action on global warming. In short, a strong showing for the CSA in the upcoming vote will dramatically improve the climate debate within the Congress. *** THE ACTION *** -- Call, Fax, or Email your Senator You can find contact information for your Senators by going to the following UCS web page: < http://www.ucsaction.org >. Enter your zip code on the right side where it says "Find Your Legislators." Calls to all Senators can be placed via the Congressional Switchboard, (202) 224-3121. -- MAIN MESSAGE: Support S. 139, the Climate Stewardship Act. As a signature of the 'State of Climate Science: October 2003', I am aware of the scientific consensus on climate change and the need for federal action to reduce our emission of heat- trapping gases. -- TIMING: Please act now! Absolute deadline is end of the day on 10/29/03, because the Senate is expected to vote on S.139 on October 30th. *** SUPPORTING MESSAGES *** -- Carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from major industrial sources are contributing to climate change, which will bring with it serious changes to our way of life and damage America's economy. -- The Bush Administration's claims that mandatory emissions reductions would be too costly fail to account for the "costs of inaction" on global warming -- costs such as rising sea levels, extreme weather, and loss of biodiversity. They also ignore our responsibility to leave our children and grandchildren with a healthy environment. -- The Climate Stewardship Act's market-based approach would harness American technological know-how to find the most cost effective ways to cut our emissions of heat-trapping gases. Off-the-shelf reductions already available include producing more electricity from clean renewable sources, limiting carbon pollution from dirty coal-fired power plants, increasing the energy efficiency of our homes and factories, and making cars go further on a gallon of gas. By encouraging investment in these and other methods, the act would also ensure that American technology remains competitive as other countries move to reduce their own emissions. -- As the world's number one emitter of heat-trapping gases, the United States should be a leader in the fight to curb global warming instead of trailing behind the rest of the world. Our voluntary emission reduction measures have failed. In fact, US emissions are nearly 12 percent higher now than they were in 1990. -- Climate change is a serious problem, and the potential impacts of a changing climate are likely to have serious ramifications on the ecology and economy of [your state]. [Then use a local "hook." Put some specific information in here about likely changes in sea-level rise, water availability, changes in ecosystem services, potential health threats, potential adjustments to agriculture or ranching or forestry, etc.] We need a strong emissions reduction plan to help slow global warming and thus prevent the worst-case scenarios from coming true. [For more information about specific regional impacts, check out the ESA/UCS reports on California http://www.ucsusa.org/climatechange/california.html , the Gulf Coast states < http://www.ucsusa.org/environment/gulf.htm >, and the Great Lakes states < http://www.ucsusa.org/greatlakes/ >; or go to < http://www.climatehotmap.org > for summaries of the "Climate Change Impacts on the United States: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change"]. -- A Massachusetts Institute of Technology analysis of the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act has found that it could be a cost effective measure to address global warming. With an annual price of implementing the bill as little as $40 per household per year, the study clear proves false Bush administration claims that mandatory emissions reductions would be too costly. *** SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION *** To read the bill go to the Library of Congress' Thomas site: < http://thomas.loc.gov/ > (enter S 139 in the "Bill Number" box) or http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00139: > @*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*@ .To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .To post: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .To join : [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
