Democrats rally to defend climate bill and EPA ruling

The row over the proposed US climate change bill rumbled on this week, as a number of Democrat Senators called on the architects of the bill to scale down its ambitions and Republicans moved forward with efforts to block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating against carbon emissions.

Both moves brought a robust response from senior Democrats and White House officials who said they remained committed to passing a cap-and-trade bill this year and would defend the EPA's recent ruling that it can regulate carbon emissions under the existing Clean Air Act.

Several moderate Senators, including Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Agriculture Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, and Policy Chairman Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, have called for a change in tactics as they battle to secure cross-party support for the proposed Boxer-Kerry climate change bill.

They suggested that the White House delay the controversial cap-and-trade element of the bill and instead focus on passing a bill including energy reforms that will significantly reduce US carbon emissions.

However, Senator John Kerry, who is currently working on a compromise version of the bill with independent Senator Joe Lieberman and Republican Lindsey Graham, dismissed the idea, insisting that proposals to put a price on carbon emissions through a cap-and-trade scheme were central to the bill's success.

His comments came as White House environment and climate change advisor Carol Browner told reporters that the president remained committed to passing climate change legislation as soon as possible.

Meanwhile, the row over the EPA's decision to issue an "endangerment finding " that allows it to regulate carbon emissions under the existing Clean Air Act escalated when Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski said yesterday that she would seek a vote next week that would stop the Agency from acting to tackle emissi ons.

"I do not believe, and I don't believe that most of my colleagues in the Senate believe, that the EPA is the entity that is the best suited to develop climate change policy for this country," the Alaskan Senator told reporters. " I'm trying to get a time-out. I'm trying to allow the legislative process to proceed. I'm hopeful that we'll be able to have a vote that will allow for that discussion."

An amendment that would stop the EPA from acting is now expected to be added to a vote on raising the US debt ceiling that is scheduled for January 20.

Controversially, The Washington Post reported this week that two lobbyists who work for high-profile energy clients had assisted Murkowski's office in drafting the original version of the amendment last year.

A spokeman for Murkowski confirmed that Jeff Holmstead and Roger Martella Jr., both of whom previously held senior positions at the EPA during the Bush administration, offered "technical assistance" on a version of the amendment. However, he insisted that "Senator Murkowski and her staff write all of her amendments".

Senior Democrats including the bill's co-author Barbara Boxer quickly rallied to support the EPA, issuing a letter criticising Murkowski's amendment. " Debating policy choices regarding the appropriate response to unchecked climate change is fair, and the Senate will continue to evaluate the best tools for addressing greenhouse gas emissions," the letter said. "But repealing an endangerment finding based upon years of work by America's scientists and public health experts is not appropriate."

In related news, US Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue waded into the row yesterday, hinting that the business group may sue the EPA over its decision. "It is simple to say we will not stand still and let the endangerment finding, as narrow as it was intended to be, stand," Donohue told reporters.

The Chamber's opposition to climate change legislation has proved highly controversial in recent months and prompted a number of high-profile exits last year from businesses opposed to its aggressive lobbying against efforts to curb carbon emissions.