­

Bernie Sanders is my hero. He was th­e first politician to come aboard at the f­irst demonstration that began the Step It Up movement. And he's been the greatest champion in the Senate of solutions that take the science seriously. Here's what he said in the Senate yesterday:­

Let me co­ngratulate Step It Up. You are doing exactly what should be done - leading a strong grassroots movement that will transform our national energy system.

Earlier today, the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on ­Private Sector and Consumer Solutions to Global Warming and Wildlife Protection approved legislation, often called the Lieberman-Warner bill, crafted to address global warming. I opposed this bill for a variety of reasons. The most fundamental is, that based on the scientific evidence, it would not reduce greenhouse gases emissions enough to stop catastrophic changes in the Earth’s climate. This committee action is the first step of many in a lon­g process in Congress.

Although the legislation is a step in the right direction, it simply does not go far enough to do what scientists tell us must be done to stop global warming. If we are not extremely bold and aggressive, this planet faces dire consequences in the years to come.

During negotiations over the past two weeks, I worked with Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) to strengthen the bill and he should be applauded for his diligent efforts. We did have some success, including the adoption of my amendment that would require automobile manufacturers to improve fuel efficiency. To be eligible for a pool of new funds to produce more fuel efficient cars, auto makers would have to manufacture vehicles that average at least 35 miles per gallon.

Unfortunately, other critical amendments that I authored, and which were supported by all of the major national environmental organizations, were voted down. Incredibly, the bill guarantees whopping sums over a forty year period for coal ($324 billion) and car makers ($232 billion). Yet, an amendment I offered to guarantee substantive resources for solar, wind and other renewable energy sources was turned down. A majority of the members of the committee also blocked an amendment that would require any new coal-fired power plant to reduce its carbon emissions by 85 percent, an approach which has tremendous support at the state and local levels. The committee also voted down an amendment to make polluters pay for carbon emissions starting in 2026 instead of 2036.

The committee also failed to set a goal of reducing emissions of heat trapping gases by 2050 by 80 percent – the amount scientists say must be achieved if we are to reverse global warming. Sadly, the bill only calls for at most a 63 percent reduction by 2050.

I am proud that we pushed to improve the bill and that it is stronger today than when it was unveiled two weeks ago. Never the less, we have a lot of work to do. I look forward to working with the grassroots to improve the bill so it can meet the global warming challenge.

The American people truly are ahead of Congress in understanding that we need bold action for our planet. The voices of the people need to be heard from one end of the country to the other. I hope that grassroots activists do all that they can to demand that Congress pass a final bill that will really do the job.

Thank you for all that you are doing.

**Opinions expressed in the Step It Up 2007 blog are the opinions of the authors themselves, and do not reflect an official position of Step It Up 2007**

Comments

1. Comment by Judy Wright, Nov 14th, 2007 11:32am

   C'mon folks, we need a fair playing field tilted toward the environment. We all know how powerful the dollar is — and the urge to make a profit! IF we make cleaner technologies cheaper, customers will buy them, companies will make and use them, and everybody will R&D them!
   The only fair way is to tax every unit of pollution — why stop with a Carbon Tax? By Mass Balance, every extractor or purchaser of polluting chemicals pays the tax. If they fix carbon or wash sulfur out of their stacks, they get a tax credit.
   Taxing countries also collect (refundable) import duties for goods from non-taxing countries, so that there's a fair playing field, but with pollution getting more expensive.
   
   Fund for a Cool Gaia
   This moneyu belongs to everybody on the planet. governments use it to buy apropriate low0tech solutions to solve their peoples' worst problems. Clean water, tree planting, etc.
   
   Culture and Ecosystems
   The funds for the unmoneyed - subsistence farmers, hunter-gatherers, wanderers — can be used to pay off that governments' national debt AFTER they've reserved and protected the ecosystem which supports those people. (They're by definition self-supporting, and their way of life and culture is important to us all.)
   
   Judy Wright, BSME, MSSE, Futurist
   




2. Comment by paul, Nov 11th, 2007 8:36am

   As one of the privious commentors wrote, he acn reduce energy consumption by 50% today" That is no exaggeration! We've done it ourselves. (By the way I'm a drilling engineer for a major oil company here in Houston)
   I hope that someday more of our representatives in our US Senate join Mr. Sanders. All I ever see with the "others" in teh Semate is giving our tax dollars to corporations, for example the Lieberman act gives coal and auto companies nearly 700 billion, why not gib=ve tax writeoffs to teh tax payers to better insulate and invest in clean tech for their own homes. I thought we were a capitalist coun, the capitalists should invest in their own companies.Again Bernie you're a GOOD MAN!




3. Comment by Greg Cragg, Nov 4th, 2007 10:56am

   Why not cut emissions today rather than by 2050.
   Using old technology I can reduce ones utiliy bill by over 50%, at the same time a similar percentage reduceing green house gas emissions, after a few years the process pays for itself by the value of the energy you save and then goes on for many more years to reduce and save much more.
   The world can have this TODAY!




4. Comment by Jim Bruemmer, Nov 2nd, 2007 11:23pm

   Has our senate not heard of co-firing coal with wood chips?
   Our present coal plants can easily and cheaply convert to co-firing and greatly reduce their pollution. The wood chips come from storm damage, fire damage, contruction waste and others headed for landfills. It's renewable, abundant and grown locally. Let' get the word out there.




5. Comment by jerusha, Nov 2nd, 2007 7:08pm

   I also wish there were more senators as courageous as Bernie Sanders.
   I wonder what happened to the proposed multi-billion dollar hand-outs to the nuclear industry and would love to hear what Senator Sanders thinks about that
   inherently un-safe inidustry attempting to co-opt the growing momentum for clean energy... i would hate for our work for energy conservation and safe alternatives to be exploited by an industry thousands of us have gone to jail to oppose.




6. Comment by jerusha, Nov 2nd, 2007 7:06pm

   I wonder what happened to the proposed multi-billion dollar hand-outs to the nuclear industry and would love to hear what Senator Sanders thinks about that
   inherently un-safe inidustry attempting to co-opt the growing momentum for clean energy... i would hate for my work for energy conservation and safe alternatives to be exploited by an industry thousands of us have gone to jail to oppose.




7. Comment by John Hunka, Nov 2nd, 2007 8:43am

   America could use a lot more leaders like Senator Sanders!