The House of Representatives passed a "cap-and-trade" bill in June and since then the Senate has gotten an earful from angry constituents hoping to scuttle such a major fiasco from becoming law. "Cap-and-trade" has fallen out of favor. Shocking how that happens when folks discover what it means to them.What's a good liberal environmentalist to do? Repent and move on?
Nope. Not if you're John Kerry (D-Mass.). If you're Senator Kerry you just change the words. Kerry is quoted in this New York Times piece as saying his new version of the House bill is not a "cap-and-trade bill." Instead, he's calling it "a pollution reduction bill." And who couldn't support that?
What to do when you're losing in the realm of ideas? Resort to semantics. I hate to return to the lipstick on a pig imagery . . . but if the shoe fits.
2 comments:
I'm old enough to remember "pollution = bad". Looked it up; I was born exactly the same year Kerry was born. Go figger.
Pollution, of course, is bad. No argument there. But calling "cap-and-trade" "pollution reduction" does not change the fact that it is "cap-and-trade." If folks want to debate about whether or not "cap-and-trade" is a good idea, I have no problem with that. But let's at least try some intellectual honesty.
Post a Comment