DC Bureau - Investigative Journalism, Environmental News, and National Security Stories That Matter

It has been nearly a week since Scott Brown’s victory single-handedly started a 2012 style Dem-ageddon, and we are already seeing how it will affect the President’s ambitious agenda. While every talking head discusses the fate of healthcare reform, but it is the prospects for climate change legislation may be far more in peril.

The House has already passed its version of climate change legislation, but recent developments in the Senate have complicated the logistics of passing a similar version. Notably, provisions like cap and trade, already controversial in the chamber, might fall by the wayside. Here are a few reasons why:

1. He won

In the wake of Brown’s Gengis Khan style pillaging of the Democratic party, we have only seen the Republicans, still in the minority (right?), get more energized and more aggressive towards Democratic policy initiatives. The Democrats no longer have a filibuster-proof majority and have lost a reliable democratic vote. This has, of course, put the already flustered Democratic Party into a full retreat.

2. The Democrats Are Scared…well more so than usual

This means that the Democrats are far less willing to take risks. In fact, some members of the Democratic caucus have hailed Brown’s win as a repudiation of the more liberal wing of the party. All this fear and loathing does not bode well for cap and trade, or anything on parity with the House version of the bill. Even though some older polls would lead you to believe that Americans see the condition of the environment getting worse, another old poll would also tell you that those same Americans value an improving economy far more than they value an improved environment. If these polls are still in play, making a serious effort on climate change legislation would leave Democratic senators fairly vulnerable to arguments that they are:

A. out of touch for focusing on the environment, an argument that can be used pretty effectively at any time before the economy recovers, and…

B. that their environmental policies could hurt the economy, a point that will certainly be leveraged by a certain group.

And yes, there are some new polls referenced by the liberal blog-o-matrix that show that Americans believe in global climate change, and yes, that they want to do something about it, but it’s hard to imagine that they would put the desire to see something done on climate change ahead of the desire to get something done on the economy. Thus, the incentive to go for more sweeping legislation is dealt a serious blow. Hey, so what if the “radical” measures that the Democrats (Commu-crats?) are suggesting – and that already passed the House – are leagues behind measures that Western European countries (socialist) have already adopted? This is America and there are a bunch of Democrats (wieners) that need to be reelected (will probably lose) and we can’t go around having people tackle complex issues like they have some semblance of a higher purpose or professionalism. That’d be weird…weird and communist-nazi. Or Whatever term complete morons are using these days.

In all fairness to the Democrats, they are facing an ever growing wave that threatens to sweep numerous members out of office. Lincoln, whoever runs in North Dakota, Reid, and others could all wind up in serious trouble. Luckily for the Democrats, the Republicans would have to take out Boxer to take the Senate, which won’t happen, so at least there is a flicker that they could possibly maybe get something done on climate change someday in the near future.  Should we expect climate change and energy to be dealt with this year, probably not. It would be hard for anyone on either side to stick their necks out on this issue, let alone for the Democrats to spend what capital they have left on an issue that could bruise them going into midterm elections.

3. Nuclear Power and Offshore drilling

Things get even worse when you throw in nuclear power and offshore drilling. Sen. Graham has been pushing for a compromise on offshore drilling and increased nuclear capacity, but he has also been quick to tell members of his own party that they would have to agree to a method of reducing emissions if they wanted to get these sought after additions. In the wake of Brown’s beheading of his democratic challenger, Graham might not be so quick to talk compromise and bi-partisanship. Either because the Republicans are in a position to get a bill they might agree more with, or because the Republican leadership is quickly leaving the compromising mood. This also greatly decreases the likelihood that cap and trade makes its way into the final piece of legislation. Then you add in staunch democratic opposition to offshore drilling, which could lead to a filibuster from a certain Florida Senator, and the prospects of a decent bill fall less within the realm of possibility.

4. Teabaggers

And what if this whole affair gets tea bagged? Could the tea party protesters apply the same tactics, anger, and ignorance of facts towards proposed climate change legislation. If so, the Democrats may face another hate storm that could cripple their ability to engage in productive negotiation on the issue.

It should also be noted that the tea bagger hive mind has gotten smarter. If the election of Scott Brown is any indication, the tea party could become a political force that could both stall the legislation and use it as a weapon against the give-up-o-crats in the fall…that’s if anyone has the balls to take on the issue in 2010. The smart money is on this issue staying on the back burner until 2011 or after President Obama’s reelection. I say President Obama’s reelection because if he isn’t reelected, you can probably kiss comprehensive climate change legislation goodbye. Just guessing.

5. Who will return to Washington?

In all likelihood, some key Democrats will not return. This gives the Republicans a chance to dramatically ramp down the Senate’s version of climate change legislation – if it isn’t already refocused on jobs and energy by the time 2011 rolls around. It would be hard to imagine aggressive limits, cap and trade, or any other ambitious part of the house bill surviving the Senate this year, let alone in 2011, if the Democrats suffer big losses.

Anyways, I’m trying to sell my old, polar-bear-powered H1 Hummer if anyone is interested. Gotta warn you, Inhofe already made a pretty sweet offer.

<!-- ckey="0B519F23" -->