In case you missed it, Senator Lindsay Graham, who has been a lone voice of reason on climate from the right side of the aisle, has threatened to derail the climate discussion and the bill that’s supposedly coming out this week (some elements of the bill, as described by Senator Kerry, here). His problem is the Democrats’ sudden interest in putting immigration issues in the forefront.
So, is he brave because he’s saying, “Enough delay on climate, let’s get going on legislation”? Or is he being an arse (in nicer British terms) by putting his feelings/agenda first and threatening an entire legislative discussion that the world is depending on?
As my colleague Will Sarni says, Graham’s “brave to balk, an arse to withdraw.”
I tend to agree — it’s a bit of both. But I’m (naively and optimistically) leaning toward brave. The fact is, I sort of agree. The administration has put health care, financial reform, jobs, nuclear disarmament, and a few other things ahead of pushing through an energy and climate bill. Those other priorities are all important, but we missed the international deadline in December which derailed the Copenhagen meetings. It’s time to act now before the 2010 election.
Who knows what all this maneuvering means for business. I think most companies are still expecting climate regulations in the coming years, but the timing and specifics continue to be up in the air.
Your thoughts?
ANDREW SPEAKING
‘Is the World Better Off Because Your Company Is In It?’: Examining Corporate Climate Responsibility