H.R.2454 - American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009

To create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy. view all titles (12)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy. as introduced.
  • Short: American Clean Energy And Security Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Safe Climate Act as introduced.
  • Short: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 as reported to house.
  • Short: Safe Climate Act as passed house.
  • Short: Safe Climate Act as reported to house.
  • Short: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Global Change Research and Data Management Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: GREEN Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: Green Resources for Energy Efficient Neighborhoods Act of 2009 as passed house.
  • Short: National Climate Service Act of 2009 as passed house.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 31-60 of 724 total comments.

  • Comm_reply
    daut30 06/26/2009 2:56pm

    It’s called climate change because it causes fluxuations on both ends of the spectrum like hotter summers, colder winters, and increases in servere storm activity. Yes there are cycles of warming and cooling but the average temperature within these cycles has been increasing which is the concern. The carbon level in the atmosphere is at an all time high for a period in our planets history in which it was acutally capable of sustaining life which it has been proven is a direct result of human influence on our planets ecosystem.

  • Comm_reply
    Blessed88008 06/26/2009 3:12pm

    Buying into this fallacy? Do your homework by viewing online some of the presentations by 80 prominent climate experts at the “2009 International Conference on Climate Change,” March 8-10, New York City (http://www.heartland.org/events/NewYork09/newyork09.html).

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    rogercharlet 07/02/2009 8:21am

    You are right about the 80 prominent climate experts but you forgot, (a convienent thing Republicans do), to include the whole story!

    About 800 scientists, economists, legislators, policy activists, and media representatives attended the event, which took place at the New York Marriott Marquis Hotel. Produced by The Heartland Institute and 60 co-sponsoring organizations, the conference is devoted to answering questions overlooked by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    The IPCC concluded global temperatures may already have reached crisis proportions, and that human activity was a key driver in raising temperatures, primarily because of the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

  • Comm_reply
    stevenwinter 07/12/2009 4:56pm
    Link Reply
    + -3

    Get it right! “To include the whole story” is a convenient thing politicians on both sides do.

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/29/2009 6:53am

    I did not say the Earth’s temperature does not change; I said there is no credible evidence that humans have any significant impact on the change. And there were hundreds of scientists that were not allowed to speak at that conference with evidence that disputes anthropomorphic climate change theory.

  • Comm_reply
    bbkenn92 09/15/2009 7:54pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    HOw sad that you believe the evidence is not credible. You should do your homework as Blessed88008 says.

  • Comm_reply
    mwgriffin 05/23/2010 4:40pm

    Agreed.

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 06/26/2009 5:56pm

    And continuing to burn dead dinosaurs is refreshing and a new way forward?

  • Comm_reply
    knightowl 06/28/2009 8:35am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    You still believe that “dead dinosaur” storie?!

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 06/29/2009 7:19pm

    My bad. Change “dinosaur” to “prehistoric plants and algae”, and my statement still stands. Either way, it’s no longer a good idea.

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    awilliams 06/27/2009 2:23pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    agreed, Angel… not sure how to write you on this site (new arrival); is this the only way? I am at a_williams2047@yahoo.com Interested in your approach on “old failed ideas”, and your take on who was “pushing” this Bill (as well as others). Write me if you can. Happy to be your “friend” here… Alan

  • Comm_reply
    ArmyMason 07/07/2009 8:51pm

    NASA is one to talk, how much fuel do they waste going into space? Kind of like calling the kettle black. Also whats to say NASA isn’t the primary cause, they go through the O-Zone layer every time they go up. Also have you noticed that we have bad weather days after they go up. I’m all for new ideas but I am not one for spending a ton of money doing so.

  • Comm_reply
    1776IS2009 07/08/2009 6:14am

    Not only that, but look how much space junk is abandoned in space polluting it up there. NASA is just a paid voice to express an opinion, simply because the voice carries weight with people, but may not really carry any thing truthful.

  • Comm_reply
    mnvikefan 10/07/2009 11:40am

    You can pollute space, get a brain. Space is nothingness. A void. How do you pollute nothingness?

  • Comm_reply
    knightowl 06/28/2009 9:47am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    Who told you that lie? Al Gore? SHEEPARD Smith, WOLF Blitzer?

  • Comm_reply
    ctrentham 06/28/2009 2:22pm

    How will we know when we have “defeated” climate change and can stop taxing and regulating? It will never happen! Just like the “War on Terror”. How would you ever know when you have defeated “TERROR”. They are both undefinable nonsense used as a tool to tax and regulate the American people. Collectivism is what it is. “We need to all sacrifice for the good of the whole.” The problem is everybody will sacrifice but no one will ever benefit except the upper echelon who is orchestrating the whole thing.

    I’m all for common sense solutions. Why don’t we just plant more trees? They devour carbon dioxide and emit oxygen. I’m all for regulations that stop pollution, but not a tax that is a “pollution fee” that energy companies pay the government and simply pass on the charge to each and every one of us.

  • Comm_reply
    bmehaff 06/29/2009 3:16pm

    I agree. We need a solution and many people who oppose this bill ignore this. We need to not only plant more trees but stop wiping them out by over-developing.
    On the other hand, this bill is no solution. It is a proposal that will affect the average American with over-taxation. We can’t continue to sustain all of this spending! Doesn’t any Obama-supporter realize that? Where is their discernment?

  • Comm_reply

    Filtered Comment [ show ]

  • Comm_reply
    CDavis89 07/03/2009 7:55pm

    “ME, ME, ME”

    This is exactly what the Anthropogenic Global Warming movement is all about. Al Gore, undoubtedly the face of AGW, has huge stock interests in the CCX, the ECX, and the CNC. Respectably Americas, the EUs, and Great Britain’s only carbon trading companies. People always complain when scientists who have no one to turn to for funding have to go to oil companies and then say that they have conflicting interests. Look at Al Gore! His business partner is David Blood of Goldman Sachs fame. They just got a lot of money from the bailouts. This makes it look like Al Gore is part of some giant conspiracy.

  • Comm_reply
    ArmyMason 07/07/2009 9:08pm

    Are you kidding, have you even read the bill? They will create committees to oversee how food manufactures use energy and produce emissions. They will have to abide by new standards that will cost a lot of money that will be passed on to the consumer, same as gas will, same as car standards will, and energy standards will. Even home standards will change, imagine not being able to sell your home until you update the furnace and water heater in your home. It’s more than 45 dollars and besides we wouldn’t have to spend so much on gas if only the government would allow us to drill more in the U.S. We aren’t all about me me me, we just don’t want to go into a situation guns drawn without knowing everything that is going on, like the typical Liberal.

  • Comm_reply
    snydes45 07/13/2009 8:51am

    Tell me what is wrong with looking out for my best interest. When I decide to buy a car, I look at what is best for my family. I don’t care if one car manufacturer “needs” the money more than another, I buy what is best for me. When I buy a house I don’t care if it meets arbitrary government standards I make sure it meets my standards. I don’t want to spend useless money to upgrade things because the government mandates it (and yes the sale price will increase when the government imposes their new restrictions). So tell me again, what is wrong with me looking at my position and me saying that this doesn’t make sense for me. I don’t believe in man-caused climate change so why should I be forced to live by your standards because you do?

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 01/11/2010 5:54pm

    you look out for your best interest at the expense of your children and grandchildren and hundreds of millions of future climate refugees displaced by rising sea levels and decreasing crop yields. Simply put, you don’t believe in man-caused climate change because you’re an idiot. Stop watching Fox News and accept the conclusions of all the national academies of science in virtually every industrialized country.

  • Comm_reply
    daringone 07/22/2009 2:55am

    GIANT LOLZ there. If I wish to contribute to charity, I will do so on my own will. Nobody should be federally mandated to contribute to (in this case “the prevention of global warming/climate change/whatever they’re calling it now”) your charity or anyone elses.

    You mention “continually rising gas and oil prices” being a source of pain? Just THINK of what will happen when companies have to begin paying this tax. It won’t be just “gas and oil” that will be rising any longer. Need to ship something? Oh noes! The shipping companies are evil because they have an enormous carbon footprint! Your $5.00 shipment just became $15.00. I’m almost certain I won’t have a job any longer as the company I work for is almost certain to either shut down or pack up and move overseas due to the tax they’ll end up having to pay.

    This is a solution looking for a problem. I assume the problem will be “Government wants more of our money, how do they get it?”

  • Comm_reply
    jtedge 07/29/2009 8:58am

    You have got to have your head in the sand. Who else do you think is going to pay for any spending bill that is passed in congress? ME, ME, ME, that is why we are against most of them. The Obama administration has spent more money in the first 6 months than any other president. That is money that comes from me and you unless you are in the legislature. They have so many free perks that they do not pay taxes on that it makes no difference to them.
    Ask any of them if they will be part of the new health care system or if they will continue to get free medical care for them and their families.

  • Comm_reply
    vrbahs 08/15/2009 6:04pm

    we have more trees now than we had when the pioneers were treking cross the plains. more concentrated and in back yards but there none the less.


Vote on This Bill

19% Users Support Bill

1150 in favor / 4828 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments