A Failing Climate and Bill

Over the past year the Senate has only talked about climate with very little action. Lee Wasserman, director of Rockefeller Family Fund, posted an article today, July 26th, on the Huffington Post entitled "Four Ways to Kill a Climate Bill." In this commentary, Wasserman speaks on behalf of the failing climate bill and discusses its demise as a result of the nation "weaving four coordinated threads into a shroud of inaction." These sewed in threads include tip-toeing around the real issues due to polling, working for historic polluters and not the American people, allowing the bill to become over-engineered performing very simple tasks in a very complex fashion, and the lack of a public outcry.

Based Wasserman’s cynically, artistic language, he intended to reach a more liberal, pro-active audience. However, he does criticize the entire congress, not just Republicans, as well as President Obama. He speaks to an audience that is aware of congressional happenings as well as the scientific effects of climate change. His references to our historical past, Rube Goldberg politics, and the climate bill being sewn on a loom, suggests his audience is educated. His credibility is awarded through his work with the Rockefeller Family Fund, a fund to help inspire public activism. Wasserman is not just an old man outraged over a failing bill about the environment; he has knowledge and experience to back up his arguments.

Wasserman referring to the climate bill, he states the president and congress have let it bypass due to lacking support from those who have caused the problem. Though not started during the Obama administration, instead of starting a new change of existing problems, “the president quickly took his place at the loom.” Because of polling, the president and Congress have backed off from specific wording weakening any legislation that might be passed and making vague any possible solution. Wasserman quotes Peter Orszag, budget director, about the climate bill proposed as, “the largest corporate welfare program that has ever been enacted in the history of the United States.” They are devising a bill for polluters not the American public. Most proposals were filled with “policy contraptions impossible to even explain,” so many interest groups just dived in this pool of misguided attempts at policy-making. Obama is criticized for not following through with his “simple market-based bill.” That would have had polluters paying for the bill. Lastly, a key in a failing climate bill is the lack of public support. Without it, interest groups and historic polluters are the only ones who have a say.

The commentary makes strong criticisms to the president, congress, and the public, tagging all three as major factors in destroying the climate bill. I believe his argument is valid and consider it the harsh reality. Just as hard to hear that fossil fuels are being used up and the ozone is decaying is hearing that we all are standing in the way of prevention.