By John Lyon
Arkansas News Bureau
LITTLE ROCK — Arkansas’ U.S. senators said Tuesday they have concerns about the clean energy bill that came out of the House last week.
Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, both D-Ark., said they expect the Senate’s version of the legislation to be very different from the bill that narrowly passed the House in a 219-212 vote Friday.
Only Rep. Vic Snyder, D-Little Rock, among Arkansas’ House delegation voted for the bill, which includes a cap-and-trade program aimed at reducing carbon emissions.
Democrats Marion Berry of Gillett and Mike Ross of Prescott, and Republican John Boozman of Rogers, voted against it.
“I have some concerns with the climate change bill. … The House I think moved very quickly, and I think there are still some things that we have to work through in the Senate,” Lincoln said.
Lincoln said she is concerned that under the bill in its present form, agriculture producers may not have as much access as other industries to credits for offsetting carbon emissions.
“The other concerns are how these credits are going to be designed, and where is the marketplace that these credits are going to be involved with? What is that going to mean to ratepayers? There’s a lot in there that still, I think, we could improve upon, and I hope we will,” she said.
“I’m not saying that we don’t need to pass it. I just think we need to make sure we put our 2 cents in and improve upon it,” she said.
Pryor said he has “never been a huge cap-and-trade fan.”
“One of the concerns I have with the cap-and-trade system is, what you do is put this big mechanism in place where there is trading of credits back and forth on carbon … but if China doesn’t do it, or India doesn’t do it, I’m not sure we’re really helping the environment,” he said.
Pryor said Europe has a cap-and-trade system, but European countries are exporting jobs to Brazil and China and other places that do not have the same environmental restrictions.
“When you look at the European model, I think Europe would tell you they didn’t get it right the first time. … They’ve gone back to the drawing board to try and restructure theirs,” he said.
The senators also were asked about the outlook for health care reform. The Senate Finance Committee, of which Lincoln is a member, is scheduled to begin drafting a bill on health care next week.
Lincoln said she expects the bill to include elements of several different proposals currently being discussed. She said she does not expect the committee to propose a single-payer plan.
“The difficulty with a single-payer system is obviously we’d have to kind of eliminate what we already have,” she said. “I think that it’s important to take what works and make it better, and then look at how we cover everybody else.”
Lincoln said the existing single-payer plan for seniors — Medicare — works well for the most part, but expanding it to cover all Americans would not work.
“We wouldn’t have the providers to be able to provide (for everyone),” she said. “We already have doctors that are no longer taking new Medicare patients. The have too many Medicare patients, and they can’t operate on that slim of a margin of what Medicare reimburses them for.”
Pryor said he is undecided on the health care issue, but he said any reform that passes needs to be more than just a partial fix.
“I think we have a problem. I think we need to acknowledge that,” he said.
——-
Reporter Rob Moritz contributed to this report.
July 1st, 2009 at 10:51 am
As a chemist, I can see right where this is headed. In a nut shell, taxes on cement industry-coal user, power industry-coal user, steel industry-coal user with money being used to fund R&D at DOE or the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and on and on and on. All good laboratories but they usually squander a lot of money before any innovative idea comes to the market place. I wonder when the industry workers, like myself are displaced due to taxation, if we will be qualified to land jobs at these facilities and pay ourselves. It is after all the private sector money and we should have first choice for these government jobs. This is politics at its best. Tactics to hide in fine print a tax in the American Energy and Security Act of 2009 is evil. US government is basically saying, “Screw YOU, private sector!” Then taking a sip of their favorite beverage and crying out “HERE! HERE!” with glass raised high. Here, Here is to us – The NEW FILTHY, STINKING RICH. Here is to Madoff for leading the way! What a way to spread the wealth. I am for conservation of resources and against deforestation. But, taxing carbon dioxide will make the U.S. the laughing stock of the world. Carbon dioxide has as much to do with global warming as my dirty socks has to do with my neighbor’s leaking sewer system. The first to laugh at the US would be the Chinese. Laughing all the way to the bank because of the vast exports they will enjoy. They will own the US. Elected officials should remember who elected them in the first place. Senate members beware, we are watching your every move and we have good memory power when stepping up to vote the next time.