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 331-360 of 724 total comments.

  • Comm_reply
    deborahg6 06/26/2009 4:26pm

    Thanks. Here’s another great site where you can connect with people in your area. Great ideas, discussions, and resources.

    http://smartgirlpolitics.ning.com/

  • Comm_reply
    WhiteRider 06/26/2009 5:18pm

    Here is a nation site, great…
    http://PushBackNow.com

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 06/26/2009 5:30pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    bigmouthmom, also enjoy this site’s recommended reading, Ann Coulter’s 2009 novel, “Guilty.” The author, in a 2003 interview with The Guardian, said “It would be a much better country if women did not vote.” Now that’s democracy!

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/29/2009 7:56am

    I’d recommend actually reading the book before you try to misquote her.

  • Comm_reply
    mpaone 06/29/2009 7:40pm

    I’m pretty sure Ann Coulter is a cyborg of some sort. Either way, here’s the full quote from that interview:

    COULTER: If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.

    It also makes the point, it is kind of embarrassing, the Democratic Party ought to be hanging its head in shame, that it has so much difficulty getting men to vote for it. I mean, you do see it’s the party of women and ‘We’ll pay for health care and tuition and day care — and here, what else can we give you, soccer moms?’

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/30/2009 8:39am

    This should help you understand better: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/satire

  • Moderated Comment

  • Comm_reply
    jodamur 06/27/2009 8:36am

    that would not be fare to the sharks. I think that would be considered toxic waste dumping. Illegal in most States.

  • cerebralscrub44 06/26/2009 4:18pm

    Actually nevermind that…I bet the CEOs and stockholders of the world’s major oil companies are also respected climatologists, just like the speakers at this conference! They don’t have any reason to resist alternative energy legislation, other than finding out the truth about climate change – that it’s a tax scheme, just like Hurricane Katrina and the Holocaust!

  • JDReiner 06/26/2009 4:28pm

    219-212

    Goddamnit

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/27/us/politics/27climate.html?_r=1

  • Angel98501 06/26/2009 4:35pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Even N.A.S.A. says humans have negligible effect on the ’Earth’s Climate. This is Communism, pure and simple just change the ‘Proletariat’ with ‘Earth’ comrade; However, Communism still fails whichever way you slice it. Lets try something new, instead of rehashing old failed ideas from the past. By ‘new’ I mean something like the Fair Tax Act {H.R. 25 or S.RES. 296}

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 06/26/2009 5:09pm

    please stop insulting NASA. I recommend you actually read the literature on their website that explores the causes of climate change that they are observing on earth.
    http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/causes/
    Here, ON THEIR WEBSITE, NASA states that "On Earth, human activities are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). This happens because the coal or oil burning process combines carbon with oxygen in the air to make CO2. To a lesser extent, the clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities have increased concentrations of greenhouse gases.

  • Comm_reply
    Angel98501 06/26/2009 7:03pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    What I am referring to is only a couple weeks old. I am sure N.A.S.A.‘s websites will be updated soon™; To, reflect that the ’SUN’ (gasp) causes the Earth’s Climate to change abundantly more so than anything humans could ever do to it.

    I feel that I am fully aware of the fraudulent science that some freaks of nature may use, and abuse, to support their self-hating petulant delusions of grandeur; But, thank you for the suggestion.

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 06/26/2009 8:29pm

    Yeah, I hope they update their website soon too, this fascinating effect that the sun has on the earth must be brand new information that was just discovered if NASA wasn’t aware of it! I wonder how they could have missed this? Oh, wait – they didn’t. From the SAME WEBPAGE.
    “Eliminating One Suspect

    How do we know that a hotter sun isn’t to blame for current global warming trend?

    Since 1750, the average amount of energy coming from the sun either remained constant or increased slightly. Estimates of the amount of energy the sun has sent to Earth are based on sunspot records dating back more than two centuries, and other proxy indicators, such as the amount of carbon in tree rings. More recently, satellite observation of solar activity from space suggest a slight increase in solar activity, but the change can’t account for more than 10 percent of the warming trend seen during the past century."
    owned.

  • Spam Comment

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/29/2009 8:06am

    You point to the propaganda page that gives no evidence and uses straw-man arguments like “Most scientists agree the main cause of the current global warming trend” to prove your point? Really?

    Lets take a look at another statement from that page:
    “concluded there’s a more than 90 percent probability that human activities over the past 250 years have warmed our planet.”

    Last time I checked, no countries in the world had power grids, automobiles, or factories in the late 1700’s. But that couldn’t possibly mean that something else is likely causing the temperature change; it has to be that <.05% CO2 concentration in the atmosphere …

  • dfelsch 06/26/2009 5:01pm

    The People are so fix netted on Mr. Obama by his outer looks and his speeches the do not see what he seriously is all about – I have to say Talk is cheap – I do see Danger for us the People – People do not like to see the trues about Mr. Obama and his Chicago clan what he has planted in the People White House – he is not a Friend of us the American People – I believe he has an problem with us the American People – because all the Action of him show it – including his Wife has a big problem with us the American People !
    O, by the way Mr. Gore did not show ?????

  • WhiteRider 06/26/2009 5:15pm

    This is a sad day for America.
    Help us…
    http://PushBackNow.com

  • bkwashpa 06/26/2009 5:56pm

    Wow…people here get it. Is America waking up? Will it take that first time opening your “new” electric and gas bills? This is ridiculous. We need to march to DC and demand resignations from the people that are supposed to be representing us cause they aren’t. Here’s your change you can believe in America. I am getting in line for my Canadian citizenship tomorrow. We are now the land of the taxed and the home of the enslaved.

  • mpaone 06/26/2009 6:16pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Congratulations on a successful passage! On to the Senate. And then to a better world. =D

  • Comm_reply
    deborahg6 06/27/2009 5:02am

    Do you really believe THAT? This administration and majority Congress have done things in the past few months that are worthy of serious legal inquiries. People should really be outraged, if they were paying attention that is. The President has appointed 22 Czars to date, fired 3 Inspector Generals illegally, and quickly pushed for the corrupt Stimulus, Cap and Trade, and now Health Reform to go through this corrupted Congress. There is no “Utopian” world coming, mpaone, take a look at other countries that have tried Socialism. It does not work, regardless of what they’ve taught us in public school and college. It’s all about control and the American people are the ones who will be hurting in the process. Do you think these people really care? Really want a better world? If so, than why are they protecting themselves from Health Reform? They will not be, nor their families, participating in the “new health care agenda”.

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 06/27/2009 6:26am
    Link Reply
    + -3

    you are the most paranoid, hate-mongering person. This is a bill to create jobs – manufacturing and skilled trade jobs for middle-class and low income people that will ease our transition to a clean energy economy. We need to start being mindful of the future, to think about our children and grandchildren rather than trying to just protect our wallets today. China and India are up and coming industrial powers – China already pollutes a lot more than us today – and the amount of energy in the form of coal, oil, and natural gas – old, dirty fuels – that these huge nations will be consuming will put a massive strain on the world’s economy. If America steps up as the leader in clean energy technology, we will be the strongest nation in the world economically, technologically, and in the area of national security, by eliminating our dependence on oil from petrodictatorships.

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/29/2009 8:22am

    “This is a bill to create jobs”

    Point to the section of the Constitution where it is mandated the federal government either a) has the responsibility to or b) has the authority to create jobs.

  • Comm_reply
    bnystedt 06/29/2009 1:00pm

    Once again, the repetition of a radio talk show host’s rantings. I think the pre-amble to the constitution gives the US Government some sort of responsibility. I’ll [Bracket] the pertinent words.

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, [insure domestic Tranquility], provide for the common defence, [promote the general Welfare], and [secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity], do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    They could also refer to Healthcare.

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/30/2009 8:45am

    I could fall over laughing if I didn’t actually think you meant what you wrote. You are twisting the meaning of the words so far its almost meaningless.

    “Insure domestic tranquility” – when written, it was meant that the federal government would make sure the states got along with each other. The point was to avoid the pitfalls of the Articles of Confederation.

    “Promote the General Welfare” – means the government is tasked with generating legislation in the best interest of the nation (as a whole). That does NOT mean “welfare” the same way it is used today.

    “Secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” – In a simple phrase: Protect our borders and our people.

  • Comm_reply
    BornFree 07/10/2009 7:16am

    No where in the preamble does it say the government has the responsibility, it says WE THE PEOPLE.

  • Comm_reply
    zhowland 06/29/2009 8:22am

    “China already pollutes a lot more than us today”

    With that thought in mind, lets assume that this cap-and-trade bill will work to help the environment. If we adopt it, but the 2 largest counties on the planet do not, what have we accomplished?

    Right now, China is holding up the world’s economy because we dropped the ball. If China were to suddenly stop lending us money, the Dollar would become worthless very fast.

    “eliminating our dependence on oil from petrodictatorships”

    The Department of Energy was founded for that purpose in the 1970’s. So now we need another governmental system (both taxes and agencies) to do what a cabinet-level department has failed at for the last 3 decades? There is a much easier solution: drop the restrictions preventing us from drilling our own oil and drop the restrictions preventing nuclear power plants from being built.

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 07/21/2009 8:45pm

    “If we adopt it, but the 2 largest counties on the planet do not, what have we accomplished?”

    You’re just being downright unpatriotic, now. That’s right, I’m saying it – republicans and the Bush administration got to say it to us enough times over the past 8 years when we didn’t support the war. I’m calling you unpatriotic, because you can’t bring yourself to support America in its endeavor to become the leader in clean energy and efficient systems. What have we accomplished? We’ve taken a big chunk out of global carbon emissions, and we’ve set an example for these developing countries and created a market for clean power that other industrial giants will want to get in on. We’ve stopped funding terrorist cells in Saudi Arabia.

  • Comm_reply
    cerebralscrub44 07/21/2009 8:52pm

    Drill our own oil, yeah. Destroy thousands of acres of natural habitat, disrupt natural ecosystems, and rape the land even more than we already have, just to prolong our addiction to the most inefficient and dirty fuel out there. And what about when there is no more oil? Where will we be then? I’d rather use the sun’s energy, which will be around for 5 billion more years, or the wind, which has always and will always be blowing, or heat from geothermal vents in the earth’s crust, which will be around as long as we are. Nuclear is a temporary solution, but also a very expensive one. Nuclear power plants are not very efficient and produce many tons of radioactive waste. I’d rather clean up the planet.

  • Comm_reply
    JosiahTwistleton 07/01/2009 9:00pm

    Cerebralscrub44, you wrote that this bill will create jobs. Nancy Pelosi said the same. Can you explain how these jobs will be created? Will they be sustainable if the government some day decides not to continue funding them?

    Does clean energy include nuclear energy or are you referring to solar and wind? By what mechanisms will the jobs be created? I truly don’t understand how this will work and, since you seem to be such a strong supporter, I’d appreciate it if you could clarify it to me.

    Thank you.


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