Is Lindsey Graham Looking for an Exit on Climate?

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.


As you’re likely well aware, health care reform passed late last night, after more than a year of brutal debate; maybe now we can move along to other important issues, like this climate and energy bill I’ve been harping on. But with the passage of health care along strict partisan lines, are politics in Washington so contentious that we might not accomplish anything else this year?

That seems to be the posturing from Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the lone Republican working with Democrats to craft energy and climate policy. Shortly after last night’s vote, his office fired off a statement calling the use of reconciliation to pass health care “sleazy.” Last week he made similar remarks, warning that passing health care reform along partisan lines would “poison the well” for bipartisan work on other issues. Here’s his statement:

The Democrats may have won today in the House of Representatives, but the American people lost. Higher taxes, more government control of health care, and Enron-style accounting define this bill. The upcoming elections will be a referendum on the substance and process used to pass it. I believe it will be a clear choice. Republicans will pick up a lot of votes from people who think this is bad for their business, their family, and the process used to pass it was sleazy.

I am committed to repealing this multi-trillion dollar health care nightmare and replacing it with bipartisan reform that will lower costs and improve access.

Of course, as a Republican he’s basically required to say as much. And the idea that there was any comity left in Congress, as Kevin Drum has noted, is pure comedy. But some like Josh Nelson over on EnivroKnow have begun to wonder if Graham might be looking for an out on his work on climate and energy policy. I sure hope not; I think he’s been very sincere about his desire to address these concerns, even in the face of a good deal of criticism from other members of his party. Of course he’s advocating for including a lot of things in a bill that aren’t necessarily good for the environment, but he’s been at least willing to come to the table. I would note, however, that he hasn’t explicitly committed to voting for a climate and energy package this year, only to working on building bipartisan support for a bill. From what I’ve heard from Senate staffers, it’s not clear that he has so far convinced other Republicans to join him in that effort.

Graham is also one of the few Republicans who has been willing to cross party lines on issues like climate and energy policy, immigration reform and Guantanamo, so he holds a lot of sway. This is particularly true on climate and energy, where five to six moderate Democrats are basically written off as a “no” vote on anything that includes a cap on carbon. Not only is his support crucial, but he’s seen as the key to bringing along enough other Republicans on this issue to pass a bill.

We’ll have to wait and see where Graham shakes out. He, along with John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), is expected to formally roll out details of their legislation soon, possibly as early as this week. Some details have already leaked, though many specifics remain in flux, according to sources who have met with the senators.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate