Barbara Boxer, one of the four senators to sponsor the Climate Security Act, touts it as:
the world’s most far-reaching program to fight global warming, instituting an economy-wide cap on emissions that would cut greenhouse gases below 1990 levels by 2020 and slash emissions by nearly 70% by 2050. In addition to fighting global warming, our bill will provide cleaner air, greater energy efficiency, relief for consumers, and the alternative energy choices that American families deserve — significantly reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil.
Opposing senators, such as vocal climate denier James Inhofe, see it as a threat to the welfare of the American people:
Any action has to provide real protections for the American economy and jobs, and we must protect the American families. Any action should not raise the cost of gasoline or energy to American families, particularly the low-income and elderly who are most susceptible to energy costs.
For an objective view, I turned to a recent analysis from NRDC and The International Resources Group. According to that report, the Lieberman-Warner Bill will greatly:
- reduce our oil consumption and imports
- increase our clean energy production, and electricity from renewables,
- increase the number of fuel-efficient vehicles
- increase our energy efficiency
- all at a minimal cost to our energy system, less than one half of one percent
- benefit companies that lead the transition to clean and efficient technologies
- contribute to the creation of jobs, manufacturing opportunities, and spark innovation