Word: markey
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 2000-2009
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Waxman-Markey Bill, which the House passed in July, is a strong step in the right direction. But much of the public momentum behind the bill stalled after it was sent to the Senate and health-care debates took over. This is not to suggest that people have completely forgotten Waxman-Markey. Power companies and other opponents of the bill have quietly continued to lobby for lower restrictions and decreased stringency in the proposed cap-and-trade system. An op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer over Labor Day lambasted the bill for the supposed job losses it would cause...
...task has fallen to small, independent think tanks and policy institutes. Their efforts to counter the claims of opponents of the bill have produced eye-opening reports. The most important of these, issued last week by the Institute for Policy Integrity, conducts a cost-benefit analysis of the Waxman-Markey program and finds, counter to objections, that the bill would have a net benefit of as much as $5.2 trillion. The report included a median projection for net benefits of $1.2 trillion and found that even more stringency could actually be more beneficial. Their estimations also ignore all the indirect...
...same time that the IPI published its findings, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy published a report that found the Waxman-Markey bill would generate 7,700 jobs in Colorado alone. And the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office found that Waxman-Markey would have a net positive impact on government finances to the tune of $25 billion...
...benefits of comprehensive climate-change legislation are undeniable, no matter what its detractors say. Unfortunately, the policy institutes that conduct research demonstrating the benefits of Waxman-Markey do not have a voice that can match the public claims of naysayers. In the din over the health-care debate, it is difficult for their reports to reach the public or the ears of policymakers, while opponents continue to work through lobbyists to weaken the bill. If the U.S. is to have a meaningful climate-change policy, policymakers cannot weaken the House bill any further. The Obama administration must take a leadership...
...Health care is a vital issue, but climate change is just as important. It does not behoove us to focus on one to the detriment of the other. Opponents of the bill have focused on the costs that Waxman-Markey will impose on them and not on its potential to move the United States into a truly advanced energy economy that would generate trillions of dollars in benefits. If we want a world that it is worth having health care in, then we must not let opponents of the bill take control of this issue. Evidence suggests that the benefits...