Lawmakers Hoping President Recommits To Energy Reform

By Linn Grubbstrom - Talk Radio News Service

Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), co-authors of the Senate's comprehensive energy independence and climate change legislation, said Tuesday that recent analysis from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) showed a decrease in the cost of Americans' energy bills resulting from their newly proposed legislation, the American Power Act.

"That means that every day, the American Power Act will save 60 times the amount of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico. That's real change," said Lieberman.

Both Senators said they are looking forward to hearing President Barack Obama's speech from the Oval Office tonight as he is expected to make a big push in favor of energy reform.

"The best way to avoid another tragic oil spill like the one on the Gulf today is to break our dependence in oil today to power our society and we need legislation to make that happen," Lieberman said. "So I hope and believe that President Obama will renew his commitment to comprehensive clean energy legislation."

Albright Addresses The Future Of NATO

By Miles Wolf Tamboli-Talk Radio News Service

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Thursday on the future of NATO and how the coalition could evolve to meet twenty-first century threats.

Albright, who chaired a panel to determine NATO's Strategic Concept, called for a "comprehensive approach" - an idea to create a civilian arm of NATO forces, in part as a response to the alliance's experience over the past decade in nation-building in Afghanistan. Albright also emphasized that the framers of the new Strategic Concept did not want Afghanistan to be, "the be-all and end-all of NATO." She stated that there must be lessons learned from the mission, but that NATO's strategic outlook, "has to go beyond just Afghanistan."

As the Senate continues to weigh the ratification of the START Treaty, an arms reduction agreement between Russia and the U.S., Albright proclaimed that as long as nuclear arms exist "in the system," NATO will continue relying on a nuclear component. The former Secretary of State also portrayed energy security as a primary NATO concern in the future.

U.S. Envoy Says International Cooperation In Sudan Is Vital

By Justine Rellosa- Talk Radio News Service

The President’s Special Envoy for Sudan General Scott Gration told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Wednesday that an international effort must be implemented in order to guarantee peace, accountability and security for Darfur as Sudan prepares for an independence referendum in 2011.

“We have to have more people join with us; That’s why we’re reaching out in a very concerted way to expand our team," Gration said. "Not that we’re stepping away, but to make sure that other people step up to the plate and this becomes an international issue to resolve, and not a U.S issue to fix."

Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) agreed with Gration's sentiments and said that Congress needs to “reengage on Sudan.”

“I am developing legislation to help shape our Sudan policy and ensure that our policies maximize the chances of peace,” Kerry said. “The bill will seek to re-frame U.S. assistance, prepare for the potential changes that may come and accelerate contingency development capacity.”

Kerry, Lieberman Unveil Climate Bill Without Graham

Joined by over a dozen stakeholders, but absent the presence of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) put forth their much-anticipated energy bill today, the American Power Act (APA).

After months of delay, the duo decided they could no longer wait for Graham, an original co-author of the bill, to move forward with them. Graham has expressed displeasure over the Obama administration's calls for Congress to take up work on immigration reform. Earlier in the day, however, Kerry told MSNBC that Graham will support the bill, which If enacted, he said, would leave a positive print on just about every aspect of American society.

"The bill that we are introducing today...will restore America's economy and reassert our position as a global leader in clean energy technology," he said. "It will create millions of jobs, move us towards energy independence and strengthen America's security. And it will give us cleaner air."

The Kerry-Lieberman bill is being framed as somewhat of a compromise between the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), passed by the House last year, and the broad energy proposal laid out by President Obama. On a controversial item known as cap and trade, a system by which companies are provided with economic incentives for limiting their emissions, the APA would gradually implement the policy, first on utilities and industries, and then on the broader economy by 2025. The President's plan calls for the imposition of an economy-wide system of cap and trade, while the House bill would mandate cap and trade for utilities, industries and big oil starting in 2012.

Similar to both the White House plan and the House bill, the APA aims to lower emissions by 80% below 2005 levels by the year 2050. Yet unlike them, the APA contains support for nuclear energy and natural gas, items that could win the support of conservative Democrats and Republicans. In addition, its price tag is slightly lower than both its counterpart in the House and the administration's plan. Another key difference is its inclusion of language that would allow states to opt out of offshore drilling within 75 miles of their coast.

But although the bill attempts to usher in a new era of clean energy usage in the U.S., many of its provisions already face legions of criticism. For starters, opponents say it will ration energy use for Americans by increasing the cost of everyday consumption for businesses and individuals.

Ben Lieberman, a senior energy and environment policy analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation, told Talk Radio News Service that the APA amounts to nothing more than a giant energy tax.

"The only way to reduce these greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels is to raise the cost of energy," he said. "They have to raise costs high enough so that people are forced to use less, that's how this works."

In addition, there are concerns about the bill's impact on the nation's coal industry, which has lately been the focus of an intense debate in Washington over energy safety due to the tragic deaths of dozens of miners in West Virginia earlier this year. Though the APA contains weaker financial restrictions on coal production than the House bill, critics believe the administration favors moving completely away from coal. In fact, days before he was elected President in 2008, Mr. Obama said "if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted."

According to Lieberman, the net effect of smaller investment in coal and natural gas will be increased unemployment.

'Sure, there's a few 'make-work' jobs created in specialized industries that will deal with reducing emissions," he said. "But overall the impact is negative; higher cost of energy and fewer jobs."

Click here for more on the American Power Act

Petraeus, Eikenberry Testify Before Senate Foreign Relations Committee

By Ravi Bhatia - Talk Radio News Service

A day after U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl Eikenberry testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Eikenberry joined General David H. Petraeus and Deputy Secretary of State Jacob Lew to discuss the civilian efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The three testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Committee, chaired by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).

Aside from reiterating U.S. Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s acknowledgment that U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan and Pakistan would be difficult “but possible,” the three witnesses asserted that the United States would not abandon civilian efforts to stabilize the region, if and when U.S. troops remove the threat of al-Qaeda and the various Taliban networks in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Many Pakistanis believe that America will once again abandon the region,” Kerry said in his opening statements. “Let me be clear: It would be a mistake for anyone in Pakistan or elsewhere to believe that the President’s words about drawing down troops from Afghanistan mean an end to our involvement in the region.”

President Barack Obama committed 30,000 additional troops to the region, in response to McChrystal’s request for 40,000. Unlike the McChrystal hearings, war protestors were not present in the Dirksen building hallways during Eikenberry, Patraeus and Lew’s testimonies.

None of the three witnesses could confirm Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai’s estimation that the country would not be able to pay for its own security until 2024. Nor could they provide an estimate to the cost of training and deporting civilian troops to the region for another 15 years. However, Eikenberry said there will be almost 1,000 civilians from “numerous government departments and agencies on the ground in Afghanistan” by early 2010, tripling the total number of civilians from early 2009.

“The integration of civilian and military effort has greatly improved over the last year, a process that will deepen as additional troops arrive and our civilian effort expands,” he said.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), a member of the committee, suggested that the witnesses’ testimonies made him believe that after $13 billion dollars given to Afghanistan for development and infrastructure efforts, “we are basically starting from scratch as it relates to development efforts.”

“We hope that Karzai will do everything right,” he said. “But, you know, we may prod and poke but at the end of the day, this depends on an Afghan government that can ultimately sustain itself.

“At some point we need to get the price tag here,” Menendez continued.

Lew disagreed with Menendez’s notion.

“Before the development assistance that you're describing, there was virtually no access to health care in Afghanistan,” Lew said. “[Now] there’s very substantial access to health care, in the 80-percent range. There were virtually no girls in schools, there are a lot of girls enrolled in schools - more every day, every week, every month. It’s fair to say we have an awful lot of work ahead of us. [But] I don’t think it’s quite the same as starting from scratch.”