Two Virginia Republican Congressmen like to trumpet their "moderate" credentials. Both will be put to the test as soon as Friday, as the American Clean Energy & Security (ACES) Act is expected to come to the floor of the U.S. House for a vote.First, let's review what's at stake for Virginia. From this week's U.S. Global Change Research Program report (PDF):
- Increased illness and death due to greater summer heat stress. Temperature increases range from 4.5 degrees under a lower emissions scenario to 9 degrees under a higher emissions scenario.
- Sea level rise and likely increase in hurricanes and associated storm surge are among the most serious consequences. Current buildings and infrastructure were not designed to withstand the intensity of the projected storm surge which could cause catastrophic damage.
- Wetlands will likely be inundated and eroded away, low-lying areas including cities could be inundated more frequently – some permanently.
- Decreased water availability is very likely to impact the region’s economy and natural systems.
- Over half of the wild trout populations are likely to disappear from the southern Appalachian Mountains; for warmer states such as North Carolina and Virginia, projected losses are up to 90 percent.
This bill at the low end of what scientists say is necessary, with compromises already struck to ensure support from the farm belt to coal country. It's the bare minimum, a start -- a first step towards the lower emissions route that could avoid the worst effects of global warming listed above. Even Dominion Virginia Power supports it.
But from what I've heard, Rep. Rob Wittman and Rep. Frank Wolf may not vote for ACES. Would they really put partisan politics and Big Oil ahead of Virginia's best interests? Do Rep. Wittman's degree in biology and career as an environmental health specialist matter if he votes against what scientists say is necessary? Does Rep. Wolf's "moderation" exist only on the editorial page of the Washington Post?
We'll find out soon.
