The Supreme Court decision...to restrict federal regulatory authority over carbon dioxide emissions from power plants should provide Democrats in Congress the last impetus they need to finally act on comprehensive climate change legislation. And they no longer have excuses for inaction, since Democrats have now, after decades of missteps, managed to create a climate plan that is both politically popular and effective policy.
For most of the last 30 years, Democrats in Congress have bungled the issue. Valuable clean energy policies have passed as half measures, but Congress has always balked at major policies needed to limit emissions and create powerful incentives for large private sector investments in a clean energy economy. Twice, in 1993 and 2010, House Democrats pursued carbon pricing, the favored policy of economists everywhere and nightmare for Democratic political operatives anywhere. But, each time, the Senate was unable to gain the needed votes for what amounted to politically unpopular energy tax hikes, and Democrats lost their large House majorities in mid-term elections following both attempts.
After the “cap and trade” carbon pricing bill and the 2010 election debacle in which Democrats lost a net of 63 House members, six Senate seats, six Governors and 720 state legislative seats, the Obama administration and its environmental allies decided to instead create complicated regulations requiring each state to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
But the regulations were expansive, viewed by many legal experts as stretching regulatory authority to the breaking point, and in 2015 they suffered an unprecedented stay by the Supreme Court without ever going into effect. Indeed, it was that regulatory overreach that prompted a even greater counter-overreach by the right-wing majority of the Supreme Court this week. The court chose not just to restrict the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority over power plant emissions, but insisted that there must be an ultra-explicit, “clear congressional authorization” for almost any nuance of rule-making, a nearly impossible standard given fast-changing realities of the complex energy marketplace, not to mention climate change dynamics.
|