-----Original Message----From: Myron Ebell [mailto:mebell@cei.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 4:32 PM
To: Myron Ebell
Subject: Action Alert: McLieberman bill edges closer to Senate vote
Senator John McCain and Joe Lieberman want to get another floor vote this
month on some version of S. 139, the so-called Climate Stewardship Act. It may happen
this week or later in the month or after the August recess or not in this Congress. We
have all been working against it for months, but I think it's now time to increase our
efforts. A story in Environment and Energy Daily this morning quoted Senator McCain:
"McCain maintains he has more support now than he did in the last vote, but is still not
yet at 51. 'It's an old strategy of mine: Force votes on the issue. Ultimately, we will
win.'" It is not clear at all that he will get more votes than the 43 Senators who voted in
favor last October 30th. But we need to work to make sure. On the other side, the
environmentalists are working this vote very hard and spending lots of money that our
side doesn't have. They are trying to flood offices with phone calls.
I encourage you to:
(1) urge Senators to vote No on any version of S. 139 that is offered. A target list appears
below, but even Senators who voted against S. 139 last year need support and
encouragement.
(2) send out action alerts to grassroots members. Ask them to call or fax their
Senators. Again, even Senators who voted No need support and encouragement. Some
talking points are attached below.
(3) publish op-eds, do radio interviews, and send out press releases.
(4) call or meet with Senatorial staff for wavering Senators. There is a target list below.
Target List
Senate Switchboard: (202) 224-3121 or (202) 225-3121
Robert Byrd, D-WV. Fax: 228-0002. Voted No last time. Do not talk to his staffer
Franz Wuerfmannsdobler, who is a Green, but direct calls and faxes to Byrd's AA,
Barbara Videnieks, or LD, Jane Mellow. It's incredible that Byrd might switch, but he
hates Bush, is increasingly frail, and the staffer in charge is a true believer. Apparently,
the WV economy no longer needs coal. Also, Jay Rockefeller voted Yes.
Mike DeWine, R-OH. Fax: 224-6519. Voted No. Sometimes a little wobbly, he has
reportedly given no assurances this time.
Richard Lugar, R-IN. Fax 228-0360. Voted Yes. Our leading internationalist wants
to send even more manufacturing jobs in Indiana overseas so that important diplomats at
UN receptions will be nice to him.

 Evan Bayh, D-IN. Fax: 228-1377. Voted Yes because Lugar voted Yes (he really said
this in explaining his vote to a reporter) . As Governor, Bayh helped a once economically
buoyant State become a laggard, so why wouldn't he want Indiana to keep declining.
Mary Landrieu, D-LA. Fax: 224-9735. Voted No last time. Landrieu would like to do
something on global warming, but knows this bill will destroy jobs in Louisiana, so she
will probably vote No again. But she needs encouragement.
Ben Nelson, D-NE. Fax: 228-2183. Missed vote last time. Nelson has announced that
he will vote No, but he needs support.
Peter Fitzgerald, R-IL. Fax: 228-1372. Voted No last time. Fitzgerald leans Green and
is retiring, which always encourages irrresponsibility. So he needs shoring up.
Judd Gregg, R-NH. Fax: 224-4952. Voted Yes. I don't think we can turn his vote
around this time, but he's a possible long-term project.
Tim Johnson, D-SD. Fax: 228-5765. Voted Yes. We can't change his vote, but it's fun
to see him squirm back home. While you're at it, there's also Tom Daschle, D-SD. Fax:
224-6603.
Others who voted No last time, but need encouragement and support:
Blanche Lincoln, D-AR. Fax: 228-1371.
David Pryor, D-AR. Fax: 228-0908.
Gordon Smith, R-OR. Fax: 228-3997. Oregon is a Green State.
Norm Coleman, R-MN. Fax: 224-1152. Ditto Minnesota.
Lamar Alexander, R-TN. Fax: 228-3398. He supports the Jeffords multi-emissions bill,
which is as bad as or worse than S. 139.
Arlen Specter, R-PA. He likes to surprise us, although seldom in the right way.
Max Baucus, D-MT. Fax: 228-3687.
Byron Dorgan, D-ND. Fax: 224-1193.
Kent Conrad, D-ND. Fax: 224-7776.
Jeff Bingaman, D-NM. Fax: 224-2852.
Talking Points
1. S. 139 is energy rationing. It will set a permanent cap on greenhouse gas emissions,
and around 85% of our energy comes from fuels that produce carbon dioxide, the main
greenhouse gas. It would require lowering emissions to 2000 levels by 2010 and to 1990
levels by 2016. The amendment defeated on the Senate floor last October 30th only
included phase one, but Senators McCain and Lieberman have said that once it was
enacted into law, they would be back for the next round.
2. Honesty in advertising would require that S. 139 be titled the "High-Paying Jobs
Outsourcing Act." It would do nothing to address the potential problem of global

 warming, but it would force energy-intensive industries to move jobs to countries that
don't have energy rationing. Industrial and manufacturing jobs are high-paying jobs.
3. If you like high gas prices, you should love S. 139. It will raise gasoline and
electricity prices for consumers. For economic impact estimates, please consult studies
by DOE's Energy Information Administration and the Charles River Associates study
done for the American Council on Capital Formation. Here are the web links: EIA's
analysis of S. 139 is at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/s139_analysis.html and their analysis
of phase one only is
at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/sacsa/pdf/s139amend_analysis.pdf; the
Charles River Associates study may be found at www.accf.org or
at www.UnitedForJobs2004.org. Senators who are complaining about high gas prices
should not support raising gas prices.
4. Senators Lieberman and McCain have lowered the cost estimates by offering only the
first phase of greenhouse gas reductions. But there is no point in starting down the path
of energy rationing in the name of solving the global warming problem unless you are
prepared to take the succeeding necessary steps. The first step is by far the cheapest
because everyone will be trying to find the least painful ways to cut CO2
emissions. Each succeeding step will be more costly. It's like peddling an expensive new
product by only mentioning the $19.95 down payment. There's sixty more payments
after that and each one is higher than the last.
5. S. 139 is only one small first step, but it creates the institutional infrastructure and
incentives necessary to make sure that more steps toward energy poverty will be
taken. When did the Congress ever abolish a program? And S. 139 would create a small
but powerful new class of dependents who can profit from not producing energy, who
would then lobby for further cuts in emissions. S. 139 directs the Commerce Department
every two years to assess the adequacy of the target to the goal of stabilizing greenhouse
gas concentrations at safe levels.
6. S. 139 may just be one small step, but it is a colossal waste of time and money and
effort to start moving in the wrong direction. The Kyoto approach of addressing global
warming through incremental cuts in emissions is a dead end. It cannot possibly
work. Even if you believe in global warming alarmism, you should be against S. 139 and
its big brother, the Kyoto Protocol. The EU has ratified, but according to the EU
Commission, 13 of 15 EU members are not on course to meet their Kyoto targets. Japan
will also miss its target. There is a big difference between those countries and the U.
S. The Kyoto Protocol does not include any enforcement mechanism. There are no
penalties for missing the targets. Japan and the EU do not have citizen lawsuit provisions
to allow private individuals to compel the government to enforce the law. So Kyoto is
just a game in those countries. If S. 139 is enacted, it does include severe penalties and
citizen lawsuits could compel enforcement.
7. There is no short-term technological alternative to using less energy. The U. S.
economy derives approximately 85% of its total energy from burning coal, oil, and

 natural gas. The main non-CO2-emitting alternatives are nuclear and hydro power, but
both are politically incorrect as well. There are several niche technologies, such as wind
power, but they are expensive and have so many disadvantages that they cannot
possibly replace in the near term more than a tiny fraction of the hydrocarbon energy we
currently depend on.
8. Politics involves a certain amount of grandstanding and symbolism. But S. 139 is
grandstanding of the worst sort because it involves enormous costs that will have to be
paid by people through higher energy prices and lost jobs. The people who are
pushing S. 139 are by and large not the people who will have to pay the costs. Energy is
so tied up with everything we do and everything we produce that it is impossible to put a
cap on energy use without slowing economic growth. This is even more true in a country
like the U. S. that is still growing rapidly in population.
S.Amdt. 2028 to S. 139 (Climate Stewardship Act of 2003
)
Vote Date: October 30, 2003
Grouped by Home State – Yea votes are bolded
Alabama:
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska:
Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Nay
Arizona:
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas:
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California:
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado:
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Campbell (R-CO), Nay
Connecticut:
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Delaware:
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Florida:
Graham (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Georgia:
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Nay
Hawaii:
Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Idaho:
Craig (R-ID), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
Illinois:
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Nay
Indiana:
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa:
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas:
Brownback (R-KS), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky:
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana:
Breaux (D-LA), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Maine:
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland:
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts:
Kennedy (D-MA), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Michigan:
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota:
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Dayton (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi:
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Nay

 Missouri:
Montana:

Bond (R-MO), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Nay

Nebraska:

Hagel (R-NE), Nay

Nevada:
New Hampshire:
New Jersey:
New Mexico:
New York:

Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Corzine (D-NJ), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Yea

North Carolina:

Dole (R-NC), Nay

North Dakota:
Ohio:
Oklahoma:
Oregon:
Pennsylvania:
Rhode Island:
South Carolina:
South Dakota:
Tennessee:
Texas:
Utah:
Vermont:
Virginia:
Washington:
West Virginia:
Wisconsin:
Wyoming:

Conrad (D-ND), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Smith (R-OR), Nay
Santorum (R-PA), Nay
Chafee (R-RI), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Daschle (D-SD), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Nay

Talent (R-MO), Nay
Burns (R-MT), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Not
Voting
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Edwards (D-NC), Not
Voting
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Nickles (R-OK), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Nay

Myron Ebell
Director, Global Warming and International Environmental Policy
Competitive Enterprise Institute
1001 Connecticut Avenue, N. W., Suite 1250
Washington, D. C., 20036, U. S. A.
Telephone: (202) 331-2256 direct
Mobile telephone: (202) 320-6685
CEI telephone: (202) 331-1010
E-mail: mebell@cei.org Web site: www.cei.org
CEI 1984-2004: Celebrating Twenty Years of Advancing Free Enterprise and Limited
Government