Senate Democratic leaders are resting their hopes for bipartisan climate change legislation on the unlikely partnership of Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
The revelation this fall that the two lawmakers shared a strong bond and a commitment to work together on one of the biggest policy issues facing Congress shocked many of their Senate colleagues.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is resting his hopes on Kerry and Graham, who have also teamed up with Lieberman, for getting climate change legislation through the Senate. It looks as though Democrats may pass healthcare reform without any Republican votes, but that does not appear to be possible with climate change legislation because of the strong reservations of Democrats from coal- and oil-and-gas-rich states over a cap-and-trade policy.
Reid told a group of lobbyists at a breakfast meeting last week that the success of climate change legislation lay with Kerry and Graham.
“Reid said the bill is in the hands of Kerry and Graham,” said a person who attended the meeting.
'Compromise' not a dirty word
Sen. Lindsey Graham apparently dodged a pie in the face on Monday when Berkeley County Republicans declined, for now, to censure him for the sin of recurrent bipartisanship. The county party's executive committee has decided to wait until January, and the Dorchester GOP reportedly is doing the same.
Not so, their counterparts in Charleston who voted last week to formally state their objections to Sen. Graham's efforts to work with Senate Democrats on a number of issues. That view fails to acknowledge that responsible governance occasionally requires compromise. Maintaining a strictly partisan level of discourse might work on the stump but neither party should be formally opposed to bipartisan cooperation to resolve national problems.
Apparently, the last straw for the Charleston executive committee was Sen. Graham's decision to work with the likes of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., on an energy bill aimed at easing global warming.
The GOP committee contended that "global warming caused by carbon emissions is still in doubt as evidenced by the past decade of cooling temperatures." It also cited the potential expense of the energy bill's cap-and-trade plan.
The energy bill seeks to reduce greenhouse gases by a cap-and-trade system, similar to a program that sharply reduced acid rain without throttling the economy. It also would encourage alternative energy production, which would have the beneficial effect of reducing America's dependence of foreign oil.
Unfortunately, the bill passed by the House has a number of flaws that need to be addressed by the Senate.
Maybe Sen. Graham, a bona fide conservative, can improve the bill during Senate deliberations. He deserves credit for working across the aisle in an effort to produce solutions, instead of more hot air.
