Parallel international action on climate change may have changed the game for President Obama when he goes to Copenhagen. On Monday, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruled with finality that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions endanger public health and safety, and are now in a position to regulate domestic sources of GHGs. The US legislature has been struggling to pass climate change legislation, but preliminary drafts have indicated that the House and Senate are working towards emission reductions of 17-20% over 2005 levels by 2020. The EPA is dissatisfied with the pace of legislative action however, and may not believe that those targets are ambitious enough.
Until now, Obama has been constrained by the House and Senate draft legislation. He has only been able to credibly offer the 17-20% reduction commitment in Copenhagen because that’s the best the legislature has offered. But the EPA’s new ruling could change that.
With the EPA threatening to bluntly regulate emissions based on science, Obama might have more room to negotiate a tougher stance than that proposed by the House and Senate. Though the legislature will try to pass a bill that precludes the EPA’s authority to touch GHGs with regulation, Obama’s presidential authority to veto a bill that he deems too weak to be acceptable might encourage the legislature to pass something more stringent. After all, a vetoed bill would force the EPA behemoth to make good on its ruling and ham-fistedly wallop US business and industry with regulation. If Obama negotiates tougher reductions targets that lead to the penning of a binding international agreement at Copenhagen, the House and Senate might be hard-pressed to ignore the multi-pronged pressure.
Of course, Obama’s already-leaking political capital would hemorrhage if he vetoed a climate bill and let the EPA regulate as it chooses (by the EPA’s own admission, blunt regulations would be hugely expensive and detrimental to the American economy, with factories, malls, restaurants, and tens of thousands of other small emissions sources forced to comply with draconian command-and-control reduction demands). But the ruling is another shove in the right direction, and Congressmen and Senators might dodge domestic thorns and international scorn by delivering targets closer to what the science demands.
Though the EPA rejects suggestions that they timed their ruling to influence Copenhagen, it might just be the stroke of luck that’s needed for Obama to swing a more progressive deal at this critical climate summit. A stronger deal might also make him feel better if he bumps into fellow Nobel Laureate Al Gore in Copenhagen’s green room.
By Jeff Beyer, .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
