Atlantic Examines How Climate Legislation Failed in Senate

Several critical mistakes helped kill climate change legislation in the Senate, wrote Atlantic blogger Brian Goldsmith. According to Daniel Lashof, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's Climate Center, one element was losing control of the message after climate change legislation passed the House: "Democrats were not prepared, and we [in the environmental community] didn't do enough to explain, why this was good policy."

A second reason was a less than forceful response to Climategate. Senate leaders--and President Obama--had other issues on their mind. Environmental Defense's Tony Kreindler was quoted as saying: "It should be self-evident we haven't seen the level of engagement by the president necessary to seal the deal."

Losing the support of Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., was devastating. Kreindler said that a lack of support outside the Senate played a part: "We were close with the utilities, not with the manufacturers ... these agreements are important not because of special interest politics and the influence of big money but because having everyone at the table helps make policies that are durable and effective."

If an energy package fails to pass before the August recess, said Goldsmith, senators could try to pass a utility-specific CO2 cap in September, they could go for a comprehensive bill in the lame-duck session after the November elections, or they could wait until the next Congress and attempt to get a carbon cap through.

For now, said Goldsmith, the legislation put forward by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has the support of most environmental leaders. He said the legislation would not "take off the table incentives to approve cap-and-trade at a later date--given that none of the pollution credits and industry subsidies in Waxman-Markey carried over to the Reid bill."