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 241-270 of 724 total comments.

mnvikefan 10/07/2009 11:34am

I’m not afraid of change or improving the environment. What scares me about this bill his the absolutely enormous tax burden put on the people of this country through the huge bureaucracy it creates

ClaudeLemieux 10/08/2009 4:31am
in reply to 530i Jun 02, 2009 7:25am

Waste Biodiesel, Geothermal energy, Wind Energy, Solar Energy, Ocean Current Systems are all viable alternatives to coal and petroleum. The last eight years were about control, wake up.

JMeadeRep 01/29/2010 4:50am
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jan 25, 2010 5:28pm

That article says that temperatures rise by about .36F per year. It also mentions that El Nino could cause exactly that much rise in temperature. Is there an article that proves that carbon emissions is contributing enough to global warming to justify a cap-and-trade method? That method could seriously hamper our economic growth.

Betonavette 11/17/2009 9:10am

This moronic bill should just be labeled: “Cap & Tax” because that is all that it will lead to. What a joke! Making big government…..bigger!

ClaudeLemieux 10/08/2009 4:52am
in reply to Janihall Jun 01, 2009 4:50pm

Global Warming has not been proven false, because it is already occurring, it is not theory. the earths temperature has risen 1.4 degrees fahrenheit in the past century. You can see the changes with retreating glaciers, and heat waves that have killed many people. "Plant a few trees shows how ignorant you are of what global warming really is, do some reading and stop misleading the American Public.

ClaudeLemieux 10/08/2009 4:56am
in reply to jguv Jun 02, 2009 5:21pm

Thats libelous and inflammatory, the cost of electricity won’t be raised beyond the reach or ordinary citizens.

lolmao500 06/25/2009 7:45pm

Water vapor in the air is also a greenhouse gas. We should ban it too! And tax it!

Let’s tax air and water… we already tax the earth. Next we’re gonna tax fire? The 4 elements taxed?

This is so ridiculous and SICK.

heylucy 06/26/2009 9:06am
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jun 25, 2009 10:46am

The consensus on this is rapidly changing throughout the world: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html#mod=djemEditorialPage
There is plenty of evidence that refutes the above statement, and many scientists are willing to risk their reputations to speak out against man-made global warming.

BERNARDBUCKMAN 06/25/2009 10:22am

I am with all who are against this bill——this would be a travesty if it were to pass. Our economy is suffering enough and there has been nothing but injustice done to our American workforce. Why can’t we learn from our foreign friends who have already tried and failed on some of these programs that are being shoved down our throats? Americans need to take care of America!

Arizonian 06/28/2009 2:32pm
in reply to daut30 Jun 26, 2009 2:56pm

“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…”

Sure, if you don’t include anytime before the ice age….. which was caused by an asteroid/comet hitting the surface of the Earth, throwing it into this erratic cycles of warming and cooling.. You could say that we exist due to an imbalance of weather, not in spite of it. We are still cooling than the Cretaceous period, when life on Earth was drastically reduced by previously mention event.

zhowland 06/29/2009 6:48am
in reply to daut30 Jun 26, 2009 2:56pm

They started calling it “climate change” because “global warming” was hard to argue when you had consecutive years of cooling. Carbon Dioxide makes up less than 0.05% of the earths atmosphere. To put that into perspective, it would be like someone pouring a cup of hot water in the ocean and saying they caused the entire ocean to warm up.

However, even if you buy into the bogus “science” that it is, this bill will do nothing to further your cause. Just take a look at the other countries that have already done the same thing and see their results.

snydes45 06/25/2009 9:03am
in reply to ivhouse Jun 23, 2009 10:03am

Great point. Lost in all the arguments of whether this is a good idea or not is whether congress even has the authority to do it. Unfortunately that doesn’t matter any more. It doesn’t win votes to use the constitution. It works much better to pamper everyone and tell us what we can and can’t do. Eventually they will tell us who we can and can’t vote for.

heylucy 06/26/2009 9:13am
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jun 25, 2009 10:47am

Actually, the world outside the U.S. is starting to question the validity of man-made global warming (see the Wall Street Journal article linked above). I agree, we need to stop funding Saudi Arabia, but this bill is not the answer. The environmental impact of wind farms and solar farms capable of producing enough power to replace coal-fired plants is at least equal to coal mining. Why is clean nuclear power not included in this bill? Why can’t we drill for oil here? Yes, it will take 10 years to see results, but wind and solar will also take time to develop. Why can’t we let our free markets do the work of finding better sources of energy? The government doesn’t need to be funding this.

toolib 06/24/2009 6:28am

i just mailed my congressman from utah. i hope he understands what this is because i heard on Glen Beck that they give more time to talk about post offices (census) than to talk about Cap n Trade.

Does anyone understand why there is so much mayhem in passing so much legislation?

zhowland 06/24/2009 7:12am
in reply to hardhatgal Jun 06, 2009 2:49pm

European countries have tried this system for years. Their carbon emissions have gone up 5% over the last five years, while the emissions from the US have gone down 1% over the same period (without this system). So, even if you buy into the climate change crap, this system will do nothing to benefit the environment (and in fact will do just the opposite). It will do nothing but create a new market for carbon credits (that is, it will create a bunch of Enron’s … who, interestingly enough, was one of the biggest proponents of cap-and-trade before they fell apart).

afree350 06/19/2009 5:22am

It seems to me that the only people that support this bill, dont have a whole lot to say other then something bashing the GOP. The people who only look at party affiliation are the problem with this country, they vote for reps. and then the reps. vote for bills according to the way their party wants them too. Last time I checked we were all AMERICANS and should have the best interests of AMERICA in mind regardless of party affiliation. If we dont get back to being strictly AMERICANs this country is done for! P.S. Cap and Trade is just another way to tax the AMERICAN people, it may create green jobs, but the amount of jobs being “created” wont outnumber the amount of jobs lost due to the larger expense of cap and trade. Opportunity costs people, opportunity costs!! Basic economics.

JMeadeRep 01/25/2010 11:56am
in reply to Americafirst Dec 21, 2009 11:14pm

And the ethanol fuel you buy robs families of food.

What an incredibly discriminatory statement, claiming that all Arabs are terrorists.

mnvikefan 10/07/2009 11:40am
in reply to 1776IS2009 Jul 08, 2009 6:14am

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

JMeadeRep 01/25/2010 11:55am
in reply to 4seasonslc Jan 18, 2010 3:40am

Free market capitalism is the only economic system that has been proven to provide the maximum good for the maximum amount of people. Contrary to the claims of socialists and liberals, expanding government power and the welfare state reduces the standard of living and the level of freedom avaiable to the citizens. Simply look at the history of the nations that have and currently are trying it! It does not work. The human mind, especially one involved in government, is not capable of running something as complex as a national economy. Every time the government enters into more regulations and more taxation, the economy slows and individuals suffer. It is our right as Americans to own private property! The federal government has no right to redistribute income, especially when that “redistribution” helps NO ONE. Our government is short-sighted and unfortunately power hungry.

JMeadeRep 01/30/2010 5:06am

It would definitely be beneficial to move away from fossil fuels. We will eventually run out of accessible fossil fuels (not for a while, but why not plan ahead?) and there is a significant portion of the scientific community, that believes there is a strong correlation between carbon emissions and climate change. Simply because it has not been proven yet (the IPCC states only that it is “very likely” that humans have had an impact) does not mean that we cannot move towards responsible change. If we could find a way to do so that stimulates our free market economy while maintaining a limited government, we could please both sides of the political spectrum.

The massive expansion of the bureaucracy with this bill remains one of my few apprehensions about it. Why not simply provide stimulus for independent movement towards energy reform rather than encumbering the move with unweidly, unproductive federal bureaucracy?

JMeadeRep 01/25/2010 12:03pm
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jan 10, 2010 2:35pm

One of the biggest causes of our recession, unemployment rates, and income disparity is government restriction of the economy and the individual’s property rights! If you want to point fingers, don’t point them at Bush. By the time he came to office, the system of government intervention in the market was so firmly entrenched that removing it would take a revolution! He did what he could, lowering taxes, reinvigorating the economy, encouraging businesses. If you want to point the finger for our economic woes, let’s look at the cherished FDR and LBJ duo of liberalism. What a mess! They have wreaked havoc! All we can do is attempt to give the American citizen back some of their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

4seasonslc 01/18/2010 3:49am
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jan 10, 2010 2:35pm

And now the Dems are doing the same thing as the Reps did – making themselves more powerful and stripping the rest of us of all of our rights. Where is the PUBLIC representation for this taxation? Nowhere. Where is this bill coming from? Our SUPPOSED rep’s in the House and Senate who could give a rats behind what we say or think. I agree with you Bush sucked, but so does every politician that makes ANY decision against their constituents. That meaning damn near every one of them.

cerebralscrub44 06/26/2009 3:50pm
in reply to deborahg6 Jun 26, 2009 3:28pm

Good job, majority of the House of Representatives. Now on to the Senate.

4seasonslc 01/18/2010 3:44am
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jan 10, 2010 2:35pm

Go figure that Bush had to be brought into it. I hate the guy too, but now you’re just pointing fingers. If you look at what has been accomplished, Obama is no better. Dems or Reps – they are all the same making the fat pockets fatter.

robert912 06/15/2009 6:58pm
in reply to chillywilly Jun 14, 2009 6:15pm

The reasonable solution is to get the government OUT of the energy sector. Oil, coal, hydro, nuclear are by FAR the most efficient forms of energy production and these meddling idiots have been systematically dismantling our ability to FUNCTION as a people and a country.The global warming hoax is an income transfer program and a way for the bankrupt federal government to increase it’s control and tax revenue.This has absolutely nothing to do with the environment.

Moderated Comment

ksavage 08/24/2009 9:43am
in reply to hardhatgal Jun 06, 2009 3:12pm

Wow, how did you uncover such indisputable, gut-wrenching hard evidence?

ksavage 08/24/2009 9:42am
in reply to hardhatgal Jun 06, 2009 3:09pm

The bad news is that you’re looking for a political party that cares about people.

JMeadeRep 01/25/2010 11:48am
in reply to cerebralscrub44 Jan 23, 2010 6:00am

All that data proves to me is that we have a cyclic pattern. Temperature was high in the 1880s, and it cooled in the 1970s (there was a great scare about “global cooling” then, ironic), and has now risen again to the same point it was at.

If I’m missing something, let me know. I am always, sincerely, open to learning.

deborahg6 06/26/2009 3:28pm

Time to get to work on our Senators. I’m so proud of John Boehner, way to go!!

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