Democrats hunting for enough climate bill votes

WASHINGTON — Democrats scrambled for votes Friday to push through a historic and hotly contested bill to combat global warming and usher in an era of cleaner but more expensive energy. To Republican opponents, it’s the largest tax increase ever.

Hours before the scheduled, vote it was unclear whether House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had enough support to pass the legislation.

By midmorning, Democrats hadn’t reached the 218 votes they would need to pass the bill if everyone voted, according to a Democratic leadership aide who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions. Majority Democrats need a majority of those voting; only 423 lawmakers showed up for a procedural vote in the morning.

The bill would impose, for the first time, limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollution from power plants, factories and refineries. It also would force a shift from coal and other fossil fuels to renewable energy and efforts toward greater energy efficiency.

Pelosi has staked her prestige on passing the bill, pledging weeks ago to do see before the July 4 holiday recess.

Even if the House acts, the bill will have an uphill climb in the Senate, where supporters will need 60 votes to overcome an almost certain Republican filibuster. The Senate has not taken up a climate bill, preferring to wait for the House to move first.

House passage depended on winning over few fence-sitting Democrats worried that the pollution cap would cause job losses and higher energy prices — and repercussions in next year’s election.

This “amounts to the largest tax increase in American history under the guise of climate change,” said Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind.

While the bill would impose a “cap-and-trade” system that would force higher energy costs, Republicans for weeks have branded it an energy tax on every American.

The legislation, totaling about 1,200 pages, would require the U.S. to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and about 80 percent by the next century.

U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are rising at about 1 percent a year and are expected to keep going up without mandatory reductions.

Under the bill, the government would limit heat-trapping pollution from factories, refineries and power plants. It would distribute pollution allowances that could be bought and sold, depending on whether a facility exceeds the cap or makes greater pollution cuts than are required.

President Barack Obama on Thursday called it “a vote of historic proportions … that will open the door to a clean energy economy” and green jobs. “It will create millions of new jobs,” Pelosi insisted.

Both Obama and Pelosi preferred to focus on the economic issues rather than on what environmentalists view as the urgency of reducing carbon emissions blamed for global warming.

The Rust Belt coal-state Democrats who have been sitting on the fence worry about how to explain their vote for higher energy prices to people back home — and how the vote might play out in elections next year.

Republicans have been quick to exploit those concerns.

“Democratic leaders are poised to march many moderate Democrats over a cliff … by forcing them to vote for a national energy tax that is unpopular throughout the heartland,” Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said.

Everyone agrees that under this cap-and-trade system, the cost of energy is expected to increase. There is disagreement over how much of the added cost would be passed onto consumers. Democrats argue that much of the cost increase could be offset by other provisions in the bill.

Two reports issued this week — one from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the other from the Environmental Protection Agency — seemed to support that argument.

The CBO analysis estimated that the bill would cost an average household $175 a year; the EPA put it at between $80 and $110 a year.

Republicans questioned the validity of the CBO study and noted that even that analysis showed actual energy production costs increasing $770 per household. Industry groups have cited other studies showing much higher cost to the economy and to individuals.

On the Net:

American Clean Energy and Security Act: tinyurl.com/ph52vs