Failure to Win Public Option Hurts Progressives in Fight For Strong Climate Bill:

[amborin]

House liberals shift climate change tactics, will not draw 'lines in the sand'

snip

....A group of 45 House Democrats, all members of the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition (SEEC), sent a letter late last month to congressional leaders, urging them to retain strong caps on carbon emissions. But the missive notably did not include any threat to oppose a stripped-down bill.
The letter stated only that the coalition “feels that it is of the highest priority that any comprehensive energy legislation includes reductions in greenhouse gas emissions necessary to spur investment in American clean energy technologies, and is consistent with reduction targets in the House-passed legislation.”
That stands in contrast to the language used last August in the healthcare debate, when 60 House Democrats signed a letter stating plainly that they could not vote for a bill that lacked a public option. Eight months later, every House liberal backed the final legislation even though the public option had been discarded.

snip

.....Environmental advocacy groups like the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council have kept up the push for a far-reaching climate bill that includes a cap on carbon emissions and strong reduction targets. The Sierra Club’s executive director, Mike Brune, told The Hill last month that the organization would actively oppose a bill that provided too many concessions to big industry groups.

The environmental groups have also taken pains to point out the political differences between healthcare and energy policy, where the geographical cleavages can be as important as the ideological differences. “Climate has always been a bipartisan issue,” Sierra spokesman Josh Dorner said.
The willingness of liberal Democrats to fight for a strong climate bill could set up a clash with the party’s base, which was already disheartened by the loss of the public option battle and the perception that liberals were outgunned by the conservative Blue Dogs.


“Progressives drawing a line in the sand for the public option was not the problem. Being weak and not sticking by their line in the sand was the problem,” said Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “Their credibility will be less than the Blue Dogs’ in every future policy battle until progressives draw a line in the sand and refuse to cave. If the climate bill is co-opted by oil companies, coal companies and other polluters, that may be a good place to start.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/90905-house-liberals-shift-climate-tactics

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[kristopher]

2. That's why the coal and petroleum lobbies were funding the teabaggers.

[amborin]

3. it didn't appear as if the teabaggers buried the PO; it was the

total lack of progressive leadership on Obama's part, combined with the apparent back room deals with both Big Pharma and the hospital corps, that led to its demise

the teabaggers were just a distraction

[kristopher]

4. That's valid.

But it fits into a larger picture I think. The pressure reasonable republics have been under is huge and I don't think we should underestimate the impact that had by empowering the right wingers in the Donkey suits.

Just saying...