-
Why Doesn’t Obama Ban Iranian Press TV? by Kenneth R. Timmerman
The Case of CH2M HILL: $2 Billion in Crony Stimulation by Rusty Weiss
The Truth about George Soros by AIM Staff
Lifting the Veil on WikiLeaks by AIM Staff
The Truth about Al-Jazeera English by Cliff Kincaid
Reaganomics and Obamanomics in the Media and in Reality by Malcolm A. Kline, Don Irvine and Spencer Irvine
How State Budget Battles Could Mean More Criminals Back on the Streets by Michael Tremoglie
Radical Muslims, Environmentalists and the Green Jihad by Mark Musser
Russian-Backed Propaganda Networks Claim Obama is a CIA Agent by Cliff Kincaid
Media Conceal True Nature of Flash Mob Racial Violence by John T. Bennett
NBC’s Mitchell Should Resign Over Telling Gaddafi’s Lies (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3) by Cliff Kincaid
CASA de Maryland: The Illegals’ ACORN by James Simpson
Special Report
The Newswire
Take AIM Podcast
In what may be an admission that the Republicans have outmaneuvered the Democrats on global warming legislation Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has dropped the words cap and trade in favor of pollution control in order to get the ball rolling again.
From the Politico
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid played dumb last week when a reporter asked him if the energy and climate bill headed to the floor would come with a “cap” on greenhouse gas emissions.
“I don’t use that,” the Nevada Democrat replied. “Those words are not in my vocabulary. We’re going to work on pollution.”
Moments earlier, Reid had confirmed he was trying to craft legislation targeting the heat-trapping pollution that comes from power plants. But he’s determined to win the war of words when it comes to a carbon cap — and that means losing the lexicon attached to past climate battles.
Gone, in the Democrat’s mind, are the terms “cap” and “cap and trade,” which are synonymous with last June’s House-passed climate bill as well as other existing environmental policies for curbing traditional air pollutants. In their place are new slogans recommended by prominent pollsters (and even a neuroscientist) that Reid and allies hope they can use to overcome the long-shot prospects for passing climate legislation.
But they’ve got a difficult job ahead. Already, Republican-led attacks during the past year have crushed the Democrats in the message war over a very complex piece of legislation. GOP opponents have exploited public angst over record unemployment levels, higher taxes and the creation of a new carbon market that’s potentially worth trillions of dollars, a reminder for voters of the recent Wall Street collapse.
“There’s been a communication battle that’s been very much one-sided up to this point,” said Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change and an expert on public opinion surrounding global warming science and policy.
In January, Leiserowitz published a study that found that fewer than a third of Americans had ever heard of the term “cap and trade” — not exactly fertile ground to be passing legislation with such a program at its core.
“That’s an enormous indictment of how little Democrats and environmental advocates, all of the stakeholders, how poorly they’d laid the groundwork among the public to actually get something done,” he said.
“And that left a giant vacuum in which opponents of legislation have been very quick … to call it ‘cap and tax’ and a ‘national energy tax.’”
Enter the rebranding strategy — a controversial overhaul that many Republicans still see as spin. Some Democrats remain dubious, too. Last week, Reid’s office brought in Drew Westen, an Emory University neuroscience professor, to explain the best messaging practices to about 30 Democratic Senate chiefs of staff and communications directors.
The idea of cap and trade clearly fizzled but does Harry Reid actually believe that changing the words to pollution control or some variation thereof will actually be more successful?
If this is a clever as Reid gets when it comes to leading the Democrats then the GOP will actually be doing them a favor if they can defeat him in November.
Share This
About the author
Don Irvine is Chairman of Accuracy in Media. He is active on Facebook and Twitter. You can follow him @donirvine to read his latest thoughts.
2 Comments for Dems Ditch ‘Cap and Trade’
To Dave #1, This POTUS HATES all small businesses from Mom & Pops up to the Mid-sized companies that burn ANY fuel,,wood,coal,oil,,etc.WHY?? He can NOT CONTROL THEM. He is a radical socialist & very possibly a Marxist.
It’s all about CONTROL. If he & his Czars cannot CONTROL you & your small corp.,,they will TAX you out of existance,,WHY?? ’cause you are too small to succeed. That will leave only those that are too big to fail,,GET IT??
Besides, the BIG corps,have ways AROUND campaign laws & donate BIG TIME to those that will help their bottom line,,like Gen.Electric.
If Cap & Trade (TAX) passes,it will be 2,000 pages or more of UNBELIEVEABLE
rules & regs & TAXESthat the average Taxpayer will be on the hook for because the retailers & manufacturers will pass it on to ALL OF US. Do NOT
be surprised if a Euro-styled Value-added-Tax (VAT)is slipped in to the back pages of C & T.
The REST of the world will keep right on polluting even if we COULD shut it all OFF tomorrow here, & OBAMA will STILL Tax YOU do DEATH for it,GET IT
Oddly enough, “Cap-and-trade” was the free marketers proposed solution to the sulfer dioxide problem that causes acid rain, circa 1990.
And it has worked, more or less.
So why is -n-T suddenly unacceptable to free marketers for a solution to the CO2 problem?