EDIT
Several gas-emitting companies have accepted the idea; Exxon Mobil says that "the risks . . . from increases in CO2 emissions could prove to be significant." The 2008 Republican platform mentioned "the challenge of climate change."
But a handful of lawmakers -- an informal survey found at least 10 vocal ones, all Republicans -- say they still are not convinced. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) said last month at a hearing with former vice president Al Gore that "on the science side, we've had very divergent views." "There are people who still believe that the moon landing was staged on a movie lot in Arizona," Gore replied.
EDIT
Still, this spring has brought a variety of skeptical statements. Steele told a national radio audience that any warming is "part of the cooling process." Asked to clarify what he meant, a GOP spokeswoman said his position was the same as the Republican Party platform. It doesn't mention global cooling. Solomon, the NOAA scientist, said Steele is wrong. She said that global temperatures had broken from their warming trend in the past few years but that data do not disprove the consensus behind long-term warming.
Perhaps most head-scratching were comments by Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) suggesting that limiting emissions might starve the world's plants. "If we decrease the use of carbon dioxide, are we not taking away plant food from the atmosphere?" he asked in a hearing. That's a bold statement, even in the skeptical camp. Patrick J. Michaels, a fellow at the Cato Institute who has challenged the scientific consensus on climate change, said plants would have plenty of carbon dioxide, even if the cap-and-trade bill passes. "I don't think that's really germane," Michaels said.
EDIT/END
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/18/AR2009051803022_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009051900005