Do you support the clean energy and climate bill?
Clean Energy and Climate Legislation

Comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation could create 2 million jobs, cut 2 billion tons of pollution and save 2 trillion dollars.

But instead of passing a clean energy bill that will allow U.S. firms to compete in the rapidly expanding global clean tech industry, Senators left for recess without voting to curb the most pressing environmental challenge of our time -- climate change.

We cannot wait any longer to put our nation on a path to cleaner energy.

Americans support these goals. And we are looking to our Senators to pass legislation that will create jobs and cut pollution.

Comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation must do four things:

Promote investment in energy efficiency as well as wind, solar and other renewable sources of power.
Set a cap on the carbon pollution that is contributing to climate change.

Complement, not discard, existing state and federal efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act. And governments in a number of states have taken action already to protect their citizens from rising levels of carbon. Federal legislation should complement these efforts, not compromise them.

Provide the leadership we need to support international efforts to deal with climate change -- real carbon reductions, preserving forests around the world and aid for the poorest and most vulnerable people on earth in coping with the ravages of climate change.

These are the cornerstones of a successful bill that will make our economy stronger and our country more secure. Oil and coal companies are expected to spend millions lobbying to protect their profits and keep the United States dependent on polluting energy sources. The oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico graphically demonstrates the dangers of our dependence on fossil fuels.

Rising global temperatures, even at the lower end of predicted ranges, could cause extensive melting of sea ice and glaciers, widening desertification, sea level rise and other changes that could be potentially devastating for the United States, our economy and people around the world. This year alone, smokestacks and tailpipes worldwide will pump a record 33 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the air, most from the burning of coal, oil and gas. The United States can't wait any longer to curb emissions, reduce our dependence on oil and develop clean energy technologies.

Agree 6K
Disagree 337

Participate in the discussions below, or Ask a Question!

jeepndd Posted 8 years ago
How can it help when it's just a tax? I think most American's are far more concerned with high energy prices and we're all tired of Congress driving them even higher! This bill has little to do with reducing pollution and everything to do with lining the pockets of the wealthy. What we really need and want is more domestic drilling and new refineries to drive down costs!
Agree 4
Disagree 1

Jimmy Jones Posted 7 years ago
First Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed."
Agree 6
Disagree 0

inSantaFe Posted 8 years ago
I do not understand how increasing the price of energy will help America with anything. It will make the poor poorer and will ship more jobs overseas. The places that gain the jobs will be the places, like China that open a new coal-fired power plant nearly weekly. The energy bill is designed to equalize energy use around the world, allowing the third world to get richer while America gets poorer.
Agree 4
Disagree 1

Leslie Posted 9 years ago
Mr. Redford, I like your position on clean energy and the spill in the gulf. I want a plan that is really going to support change. Do you agree with the Pickens Plan?
Agree 10
Disagree 0

Jimmy Jones Posted 7 years ago
In 1968 when Ehrlich predicted that England would not exist in the year 2000, what steps should have been taken to stop the threat? In 1970, when environmentalists were making predictions of man made global cooling and the threat of an ice age and millions of Americans starving to death, what kind of government policy should we have undertaken to prevent such a calamity?
Agree 17
Disagree 0

Invite your friends!