E-mail
Print
Reporting from Washington -
Republicans today boycotted the start of a Senate hearing on climate-change legislation.
The Republican members of the Environment and Public Works Committee are demanding a full Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the climate bill.
But despite the boycott, committee Chairwoman Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) still held the meeting, arguing that the EPA's partial analysis, based on a similar bill passed by the House of Representatives in June, was sufficient.
Making all the projections and running all the models would take the EPA about five weeks.
Because the Senate bill is largely based on the House legislation, the EPA said that full analysis "would likely show the impacts ... would be similar." So the EPA conducted a simplified analysis, drawing heavily on the study it already had made of the House bill and highlighting the parts that differed.
But that approach was not enough for committee Republicans, who were demanding a full, original analysis before they would take a vote on moving the bill out of the committee.
"The path to a bipartisan markup is straightforward. Allow the EPA to do a full analysis," said Sen. George Voinovich (R- Ohio), who explained his party's objections before departing, leaving the hearing room devoid of Republican senators. "I don't recall finding meaningful solutions with incomplete information and stark partisanship."
There are some differences between the two bills. The largest difference is between their emissions targets. The Senate bill demands a 20% cut in emissions by 2020; the House requires only 17%.
But Boxer and other Democrats argued there was more than enough information available to take a vote.
"There is no reason to do additional analysis and spend more taxpayer dollars when the work has been done," Boxer said, declaring that there were more than 300,000 pages of documentation supporting the EPA's analysis of the bill. "We need to move forward."
Committee rules require that at least two members of the minority party be present during business meetings, but Boxer has said she would consider taking advantage of a loophole or using arcane Senate rules if Republicans remain obstinate.
It is unclear whether she plans to conduct votes today. She declared, "We will follow the committee rules very carefully," before a recess.
In a bid to mollify the Republicans, Boxer has extended the deadline for them to submit amendments and is bringing an EPA official in during the afternoon session to answer any remaining questions. Voinovich, however, continued to demand a full analysis.
The Republican members of the Environment and Public Works Committee are demanding a full Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the climate bill.
But despite the boycott, committee Chairwoman Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) still held the meeting, arguing that the EPA's partial analysis, based on a similar bill passed by the House of Representatives in June, was sufficient.
Making all the projections and running all the models would take the EPA about five weeks.
Because the Senate bill is largely based on the House legislation, the EPA said that full analysis "would likely show the impacts ... would be similar." So the EPA conducted a simplified analysis, drawing heavily on the study it already had made of the House bill and highlighting the parts that differed.
But that approach was not enough for committee Republicans, who were demanding a full, original analysis before they would take a vote on moving the bill out of the committee.
"The path to a bipartisan markup is straightforward. Allow the EPA to do a full analysis," said Sen. George Voinovich (R- Ohio), who explained his party's objections before departing, leaving the hearing room devoid of Republican senators. "I don't recall finding meaningful solutions with incomplete information and stark partisanship."
There are some differences between the two bills. The largest difference is between their emissions targets. The Senate bill demands a 20% cut in emissions by 2020; the House requires only 17%.
But Boxer and other Democrats argued there was more than enough information available to take a vote.
"There is no reason to do additional analysis and spend more taxpayer dollars when the work has been done," Boxer said, declaring that there were more than 300,000 pages of documentation supporting the EPA's analysis of the bill. "We need to move forward."
Committee rules require that at least two members of the minority party be present during business meetings, but Boxer has said she would consider taking advantage of a loophole or using arcane Senate rules if Republicans remain obstinate.
It is unclear whether she plans to conduct votes today. She declared, "We will follow the committee rules very carefully," before a recess.
In a bid to mollify the Republicans, Boxer has extended the deadline for them to submit amendments and is bringing an EPA official in during the afternoon session to answer any remaining questions. Voinovich, however, continued to demand a full analysis.
Digg
Twitter
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Save more than