Hat and Swap — Cap and Trade

Apparently these legislative types in Washington didn't get the memo that I was leaving work early to book it to St. Louis on Friday afternoon. They had the audacity to make landmark decisions while I was away from my post. For shame!

As you likely heard, the U.S. House passed the U.S. Clean Energy and Security Act, also known as a variant of cap-and-trade, by a skimpy margin, 219-212. With a name like 'Clean Energy and Security' who could vote against this bill? Turns out a lot of people, and most of the Arkansas' congressional delegation.

Republicans dubbed this a "cap-and-tax" bill, and being that it was written by the likes of representatives from California (gasp!) and Massachusetts (fie!), were nearly unanimous in their opposition to the bill. The story was the schism between Democrats, rural and otherwise.

Rural folk are against cap-and-trade. The business of agriculture runs on gasoline fumes. The expenses, while a mild irritant for John and Jane Q. Automobile Driver, would be devastating for the farming industry, and could have a negative ripple effect (such as a rise in the imports of food and cloth), say opponents.

Subsequently, rural Democrats balked, leading to the squeaker vote. I spoke with several delegates who had "great concerns" over how this would effect the biggest business in Arkansas, which is of course, agriculture. There were references from all to "importing food and cloth like we import oil," all of which were negative references.

We can all see how the votes went down for our delegates, plain as day now. 75 percent were against it, with only one opting for it.

While the state's lone Republican, John Boozman, was surely against it, national media attention was given to the remaining delegates of our very Natural State. Mike Ross made some noise voting against the bill in committee. Marion Berry and Vic Snyder were the question marks.

Most speculated that Berry would follow Ross' example. In my discussions with Ross, he said that he plainly believed it to be a bad bill for Arkansas, so much so that when President Obama personally called him to support the bill, he say "Thanks, but no." Berry's district is just as if not more rural and agriculturally-based as Ross'.

If Berry and Snyder were the question marks, with the more 'urban' (as urban as an Arkansan can be) Snyder would have to have been considered the bigger wild card of the two. Snyder told me that he hadn't made a decision but that he indeed had concerns about the bill.

Those concerns were obviously alleviated. The decision itself is not necessarily remarkable. The congressman said that he was weighing the decision, understanding the potential difficulties for his agricultural constituency. One side obviously won out over the other.

The dissent on the other hand was slightly more remarkable. Sens. Pryor and Lincoln have not spoken favorably about the bill. I'm not sure exactly what their latest words on the matter have been on the matter, but cap-and-trade is expected to falter in the Senate, where urbanosity and rurality (words?) is spread more thinly between two Senators per each state.

Either way, a majority of Arkansas' congressional delegation believed that this bill was bad for Arkansas. The state Farm Bureau had come out against it, before and after amendments to accommodate rural economies were included. One delegate (Ross) was the rallying clarion for Blue Dogs against the bill.

What did Snyder see that the others did not?