Survey Finds Most Republicans Seek Action on Climate Change

It’s time for that national “listening tour” on energy and climate, President Obama. Some evidence comes in a new survey from the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University (seen via Tom Yulsman on Facebook). Here’s an excerpt from the news release:

In a recent survey of Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents conducted by the Center for Climate Change Communication (4C) at George Mason University, a majority of respondents (62 percent) said they feel America should take steps to address climate change. More than three out of four survey respondents (77 percent) said the United States should use more renewable energy sources, and of those, most believe that this change should begin immediately.

The national survey, conducted in January 2013, asked more than 700 people who self-identified as Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents about energy and climate change.

“Over the past few years, our surveys have shown that a growing number of Republicans want to see Congress do more to address climate change,” said Mason professor Edward Maibach, director of 4C. “In this survey, we asked a broader set of questions to see if we could better understand how Republicans, and Independents who have a tendency to vote Republican, think about America’s energy and climate change situation.”

The reason a listening tour is the next step, and not a pre-packaged batch of legislation or other steps, is to build on the common ground across a wide range of Americans on energy thrift, innovation and fair play (meaning policies that distort the playing field, with mandated corn ethanol production and tax breaks for fossil fuel companies prime examples).

This might even lead to a new sense of mission in this country, something that’s been lacking since the cold war and space race.

In Mother Jones, Chris Mooney has an interesting spin on the survey, noting that the way global warming was framed probably had an impact on the level of buy-in on the questions.

It’s been clear for years that there are ways around the familiar partisan roadblocks on climate-smart energy policies. In 2009, the “Six Americas” survey by the same George Mason researchers and counterparts at Yale revealed this clearly. I distilled those findings into three slides here.

Here’s a bit more on the survey from the George Mason Web site:

This short report is based on a January 2013 national survey of Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents. We found that they prefer clean energy as the basis of America’s energy future and say the benefits of clean energy, such as energy independence (66%) saving resources for our children and grandchildren (57%), and providing a better life for our children and grandchildren (56%) outweigh the costs, such as more government regulation (42%) or higher energy prices (31%).

By a margin of 2 to 1, respondents say America should take action to reduce our fossil fuel use. Also, only one third of respondents agree with the Republican Party’s position on climate change, while about half agree with the party’s position on how to meet America’s energy needs.

You can download the report here: A National Survey of Republicans and Republican-Leaning Independents on Energy and Climate Change.

View the original article here

House awaits Senate action

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives, where comprehensive immigration reform went to die in 2006, is the wild card in this year's immigration-reform debate.

House leaders are taking a wait-and-see approach as the Senate begins crafting a bipartisan immigration-reform bill, and while advocates are optimistic about its chances, many House conservatives are sure to continue to oppose any polices that might be construed as amnesty for illegal immigrants.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has signaled a willingness to tackle the issue this year in a bipartisan way, but he might have trouble getting a majority of his fellow Republicans to go along with him.

A decision to collaborate with Democrats on such a hot-button issue as immigration could put his leadership position in jeopardy.

Politically, the anti-amnesty sentiment continues to simmer with the grass-roots "tea party" activists who are often influential in GOP primaries.

And to some House Republicans, the long-term future electoral viability of the Republican Party may be a secondary priority to their avoiding a primary foe next year.

So far, Boehner has not endorsed or rejected the bipartisan framework that was announced last Monday by a group of four Democratic senators and four Republican senators.

Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake, both Arizona Republicans, are among the so-called "Gang of Eight" who crafted the plan.

"Boehner is going to play this close to his chest, see what happens in the Senate and not commit too early," said David Cort, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. "Why waste political capital now when he doesn't have to? He can let the Senate go first."

Flake, who was sworn in as Arizona's newest senator last month after six terms in the House, understands the dilemma his former colleagues face.

"There are some who aren't excited about taking up this thing," said Flake, who already is trying to sell the Senate plan to House Republicans. "Anybody with elections every two years worries more about that. But I think everybody is anxious to see this in the rear-view mirror. So that's some motivation there."

Less risk in Senate

While there is no guarantee the Senate will ultimately pass a comprehensive bill, senators generally face fewer political risks in taking on divisive issues than House members do, analysts said.

In representing an entire state, senators tend to be accountable to a more politically diverse group of constituents and can take a more moderate view, said Stephen Yale-Loehr, immigration-law expert and professor of law at Cornell University.

They also have the relative luxury of having to face voters every six years rather than every two years as House members do.

That makes it a bit easier for them to look at issues from a longer-term perspective, Yale-Loehr said.

"Having to face re-election every two years can make a member of the House more cautious thinking about how this might affect his or her primary chances," he said. "Republicans have to worry about a primary-election challenge from a 'tea party' or other conservative candidate."

In 2006, the then-GOP-run Senate passed a comprehensive immigration-reform bill co-authored by McCain and the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., but it went nowhere in the Republican-controlled House, which instead passed its own tough enforcement bill that also ultimately failed.

Later that year, Republicans lost control of both the House and Senate in a Democratic wave election. Republicans regained control of the House in the 2010 election.

On Wednesday, Politico reported that a group of eight House members -- four Democrats, four Republicans -- are quietly working on their own immigration-reform plan to offer to House leaders for consideration. None is from Arizona.

Flake acknowledged that some of his former GOP House colleagues who represent Republican-dominated districts could attract a primary foe by embracing comprehensive immigration reform.

However, even Republicans who come from areas with few Hispanic voters have an interest in solving the problem, he said.

"I hope that we have enough who say, 'I'll risk it in my primary, but, boy, for the good of my party, we need to broaden the base,'" Flake said.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is expected to be more open-minded toward immigration reform than his predecessor, Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who has already condemned the Senate blueprint as "amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

Likewise, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who chairs the panel's Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security, is "a smart guy who approaches this thing in a very deliberative fashion," Flake said.

"With the people in place now, from Goodlatte to Gowdy to others, we are in a better position than we were before," Flake said.

Hopeful on consensus

While Arizona's two senators are in a leading role on reform, many of its House members are largely silent, though some are hopeful.

Rep. David Schweikert, a Republican who represents the northeast Valley, praised the Senate's efforts in a written statement to The Arizona Republic on Wednesday, revealing support for some principles of reform.

Like most Republicans, he argued enhanced border security is a must.

But he also said an immigration overhaul to deal with the millions of people living in the country illegally is "well overdue."

He cautioned that such a plan should not favor illegal immigrants over those who have been waiting in line to come legally to the United States.

"I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to find a fair and equitable solution that addresses the very real problems that exist in our system of immigration and border security," he said.

Rep. Ron Barber, a Democrat from Tucson, said he expects a bloc of Republicans to oppose reform but the group may not be large enough to hold up a bill.

"Coming out of the election, Republicans are reflecting across the board on what they need to do on a number of issues, where they stand and how they're perceived, and one of those issues is fixing the broken immigration system," Barber said.

He pointed to "major breaks" within the Republican caucus in recent weeks that aided passage of bills on the "fiscal cliff," Hurricane Sandy relief and the federal-debt ceiling.

"I really believe that can and will happen on immigration," he said.

Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, a Democrat who represents a swing district in northern Arizona, also is hopeful.

"I'm optimistic both parties can agree on some of these principles … and move past the stalemate that's been in place so long," Kirkpatrick said.

Freshman Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., said she is grateful that Arizona's two senators are among those who are leading the reform effort.

"It's great for our state and it's great for the prospect of getting reform done," she said.

The Latino factor

The GOP-led House is more likely to pass comprehensive reform if it passes overwhelmingly in the Democratic-led Senate with strong support from Republican senators, Yale-Loehr said.

"But if it passes by just a few votes, I think that will make it harder to get something similar through the House," he said.

If the Senate sends over a strong bipartisan bill, Boehner most likely will call the House GOP caucus together and try to convince them that passage is key to the Republican Party's political future and its ability to attract the growing number of Latino voters, Cort said.

President Barack Obama won more than 70 percent of Latino voters in his re-election bid. Latino voters also overwhelmingly favored Democratic congressional candidates.

"I think Boehner will tell his GOP caucus that Republicans cannot afford to be blamed for the bill going down," Cort said. "He will tell them not to give the Democrats a weapon to use against them at the polls."

Jennifer Gordon, a law professor at Fordham University School of Law in New York City, said she believes the message will resonate with a growing number of House Republicans.

"Supporting reform may not be in the personal interests of some representatives, but it's unquestionably in the interests of the Republican Party as a whole," Gordon said. "The last election was a powerful message to the Republican Party. That's what makes me reluctant to make the standard prediction of it (reform) failing in the House."

Flake said he believes Boehner would be willing to move forward with an immigration bill even if a majority of House Republicans oppose it.

"He's done that a couple of times recently (passed bills largely with Democratic votes), and I think he will do it again," Flake said. "The desire to get immigration behind us extends pretty far and pretty deep, even with people who don't necessarily agree so much with the principles or the direction of it."

Boehner also could be helped by Republican political-action committees such as the Hispanic Leadership Network, which sent e-mails to House Republicans last week urging them to avoid inflammatory rhetoric in the coming debate that could alienate Latino voters.

The group, the Hispanic outreach arm of the American Action Network, cautioned GOP members against referring to immigrants as "illegals" or "aliens" or denouncing the Senate plan as "amnesty."

Meanwhile, Arizona's House members are reviving their bipartisan meetings in the new Congress, a move that the senior member of the delegation,Democratic Rep. Ed Pastor, hopes can help bring consensus on immigration and other issues.

The first outing was an evening social last month hosted by Republican Rep. Trent Franks.

Pastor plans to sponsor monthly delegation breakfasts beginning Feb. 14, and other members are expected to host events as well.

"They have their own interests, they have their own politics, they have districts they represent," Pastor said of his colleagues. "For me, it's holding conversations in a private manner to talk about (immigration reform) and try -- as legislation is developed and passed -- to speak with them and encourage and answer questions."

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Republicans block action on Bush trade pacts (Reuters)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked action on three free trade agreements they have long supported to protest against President Barack Obama's decision to include a retraining program for workers hurt by trade in one of the bills.

"We gave the administration fair warning on this," said Senator Orrin Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, referring to the fight over the Trade Adjustment Assistance program.

"We made it clear time and time again that we would not stomach attaching a program as big as this on to these agreements. The president knew where we stood and he decided to ignore those who don't agree with him," he told reporters.

The deals with South Korea, Panama and Colombia are expected to boost exports by $13 billion, helping to support or create tens of thousands of jobs.

But the dispute clouds chances of their approval by the end of July, as both the Obama administration and many Republicans have said they want.

Democrats accused Republicans of a political stunt aimed at hurting Obama ahead of the 2012 presidential elections, after demanding for years he send the deals to Congress for a vote.

"Today the agreements were there -- and Senate Finance Committee Republicans were not," U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said in a statement.

"Americans need their leaders at work -- in their seats, eyes on the ball, pushing every day to enact policies that create jobs here at home, advance this country's economic recovery, and help our working families."

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus canceled a Thursday meeting of the panel after the Republican boycott.

Hatch said Republicans were making a principled stand and tried to persuade Democrats to reschedule the meeting to give senators more time to review the legislation and the 97 amendments expected to be offered.

"Why isn't this reasonable to give the senators on the committee the time to consider these agreements? What is the White House afraid of?" Hatch said.

$1 BILLION A YEAR

TAA was broadened in 2009 to cover more workers and provide more healthcare assistance. But those new benefits, which boosted the cost of the program to about $1 billion per year, expired early this year and Republicans in the House of Representatives, fresh from their victory at the polls in November, balked at renewing them.

That made Obama's job to win approval of the trade pacts more politically difficult since many Democrats blame previous agreements for the loss of manufacturing jobs.

In May, the White House warned it would not send the trade deals to Congress for votes until there was also a deal to renew TAA. They negotiated a compromise TAA program with House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, a Republican, and stuck it in the implementing bill for the South Korea deal, although Camp did not agree to that move.

Baucus, a Democrat, said U.S. exporters would pay a price for the setback.

"Every day we delay, we lose ground to our competitors. Tomorrow, Korea's trade agreement with the European Union goes into force. In August, Colombia's deal with Canada enters into force," said Baucus.

He said after the aborted meeting that he still hoped for action in July on the pacts.

The House Ways and Means Committee could take up the agreements next week, but Republicans in that chamber also are insisting on a separate vote on TAA.

The three deals were signed during the administration of former Republican President George W. Bush and have been languishing for more than four years.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in a letter to Baucus and Hatch, said it strongly supported both the trade deals and renewal of TAA, as well as two trade programs for developing countries included in the Senate draft version of the Colombia implementing bill.

"A U.S. Chamber study has warned that the United States would lose more than 380,000 jobs and $40 billion in export sales if the pending agreements suffer further delays," said R. Bruce Josten, the group's executive vice president.

(Additional reporting by Donna Smith; editing by Mohammad Zargham)

View the original article here

Illegal Immigration Will See No Action with White House Up for Grabs (ContributorNetwork)

COMMENTARY | Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) set off a firestorm last week with his comments connecting the devastating Arizona wildfires to illegal immigration. According to the Huffington Post, McCain, the 2008 Republican nominee for president, said, "There is substantial evidence that some of these fires are caused by people who have crossed our border illegally." In light of McCain's comments, illegal immigration is once again dominating national headlines.

A Frustrated Electorate

A Pew Hispanic Center study found in 2010 there were 11.2 million illegal immigrants living in the United States. Poll after poll shows an anxiety-ridden nation frustrated by the government's inability to stop the influx of illegal crossings from Mexico. A Rasmussen poll indicates that only 30 percent of Americans believe the border is secure, while 64 percent say it is not. An overwhelming 84 percent of Americans are concerned that illegal immigrants could be an unfair burden on schools, hospitals and government services, according to Gallup. These poll numbers have forced politicians at the state and federal level to address illegal immigration, but a solution has proved elusive.

Legislative Action or Inaction?

Thus far in 2011, state legislatures have introduced 52 bills dealing with illegal immigration. Most of these bills replicate elements of Arizona's controversial SB 1070, which gave law enforcement officers broad powers in deciphering the immigration status of an individual.

Utah's HB497, Georgia's HB87 and Indiana's HB56 all hold provisions allowing law enforcement to check perpetrators' immigration status during an arrest, although the conditions in each state vary. However, states have tried to learn from what happened in Arizona. For example, Utah passed three immigration laws and established a guest worker program that would allow illegal immigrants to work, with one stipulation being that they learn English. Small concessions such as these have done little to quiet critics who take issue with the intrusiveness of the laws.

On the federal level, President Obama has made the DREAM Act the focal point of his immigration reform. The act died last year in the Senate thanks to a Republican filibuster. Under the DREAM Act, "qualifying undocumented youth would be eligible for a six year long conditional path to citizenship that requires completion of a college degree or two years of military service."

At all levels, immigration legislation has run into problems. State laws are continually challenged in courts for violating civil liberties. At the federal level, the DREAM Act has yet to become law despite its reintroduction in May of this year.

Ratings Galore

The media have cashed in on illegal immigration by fueling partisanship. Illegal immigration provides the perfect backdrop for screaming pundits on the left and right. The media have the keen ability to simplify complicated issues into basic arguments. Republicans are portrayed as nativists who desire the expulsion of illegal immigrants because they drain the country's resources and take jobs. Democrats want to continue entitlement programs for illegal immigrants while regular Americans struggle to find work.

For proof, look to Ann Coulter, who has made a living off of chastising liberals. According to the Los Angeles Times, Coulter said, "Then, the Democrats latched on to blacks as another mob to be led - just like women, gays, Hispanics, illegal immigrants, government workers, etc., etc." Representing the left is Keith Olbermann, who once called immigration laws "xenophobic" on one of his "Worst Person in the World" segments, according to the Washington Post. The media continue to paint both sides as "fringe" elements incapable of coming to an agreement.

Playing Both Sides

Sen. McCain's comments simply reminded a country in the economic wilderness that illegal immigration is still an issue. Despite all the political wheeling and dealing, the nation lacks a comprehensive plan for illegal immigration. According to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, Latinos now make up 16.3 percent of America's total population. Pew Hispanic Center points out that in 2008, Hispanics represented 9 percent of the vote. With so much influence, both parties are hesitant to alienate Hispanics. But they also need to create the illusion immigration reform is on the horizon. In reality, heated rhetoric pertaining to illegal immigration will continue yet little will be done on the legislative front. A significant bloc of voters could be lost if either party makes the wrong move before the 2012 elections. Neither party will be moving on illegal immigration with the White House in play.

View the original article here