The Philadelphia Inquirer today publishes a column by Jay Timmons, executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers, and David N. Taylor, executive director of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association, “Millions of jobs would vanish with energy bill“:

This Labor Day, America is in its 20th month of recession, making this the longest and deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression. More than six million jobs have been lost across the country, and manufacturing has suffered disproportionately, accounting for 1.8 million of those lost jobs.

So it’s difficult to understand how our federal lawmakers could seriously consider legislation that would depress economic growth and job creation for the next 20 years. But that’s what we can expect from the far-reaching climate-change legislation headed for a vote in the Senate when Congress returns from its summer recess.

The National Federation of Independent Business, the nation’s largest advocacy organizatoin for small businesses, has joined the National Association of Manufacturers in sponsoring the comprehensive advertising campaign about Waxman-Markey now under way in 13 states. NFIB President and CEO Dan Danner explains:

We’re very concerned about the impact of the legislation on small businesses. America’s job creators are struggling enough in this economy and don’t need additional burdens. Small business owners are not able to adjust the price of their goods and services quickly enough to match potentially steep energy cost increases without hurting their customer base. The Waxman-Markey bill would significantly raise energy-related costs and lead to considerable job losses.

Here’s the TV spot that focuses on the damage the cap-and-trade regime will do to businesses and workers.

The initial stage of the campaign reaches the public in Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia. With the House having already passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, AKA Waxman-Markey, the ads encourage the public to communicate with the Senators who will next consider cap-and-trade legislation.

BTW, the ads posted at YouTube are the ones meant for Indiana (and cosponsored by the Indiana Manufacturers Association — thanks!), but they are fundamentally the same spots in the other dozen states.

From The Washington Times, Climate bill would bloat federal agencies:

The House-passed climate change bill, if enacted, would expand the federal government so much that it would take billions of dollars and thousands of new employees to implement.

Now-obscure federal agencies such as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would have to become mini-behemoths in order to handle their expanded responsibilities. Congress would have to appropriate billions of dollars for more bureaucrats, much of which is not reflected in the House bill.

“The problem is that there’s a mismatch between the government’s capacity and its mission,” said Darrell M. West, vice president and director of governance studies at the left-leaning Brookings Institution.

House sponsors of the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill were willing to compromise core elements of the legislation — angering environmentalist purists — because the first victory, passage into law, makes all other things possible. The emission goals and percentages are less important than the transfer of private sector decision-making autonomy to government control.

On Fox News this morning, a discussion prompted by the NAM/ACCF’s new study, “Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act.”

Talking about assumptions being made in studies on the Waxman-Markey bill, the central assumption used perforce in the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Council for Capital Formation’s analysis released Wednesday was that the American Clean Energy and Security Act’s provisions are what is at play.

But one of the legislation’s authors concedes that if the law is enacted, he’ll want to return to it to “accelerate this revolution.” Here’s what Rep. Ed Markey said about the emissions limits in the Waxman-Markey legislation at a presentation last week at the JFK School of Government, Harvard.

Markey agreed with several questioners who said the bill’s energy efficiency and carbon reduction efforts should be more aggressive. But he said his work isn’t yet done.

“Yes, you can find deficiencies in the bill,” Markey conceded. “But this won’t be the last time we visit this. And we’ll be able to return to this in five or six years, and then in 10 years, and then in 15 years, to accelerate this revolution so that we’re the global leader.”

From NPR’s affiliate in Boston, WBUR.

There were many members of Congress who voted for H.R. 2454 only after the time for phasing in the carbon emission limits was pushed back. That was the bait. Rep. Markey has laid out plans for the switch.

Roll Call publishes one of its “Mission Ahead” special sections today, this one focusing on energy and environment.  Jay Timmons, executive vice president at the National Association of Manufacturers, offers his contribution about the Waxman-Markey bill and a possible Senate version.

From “An ‘Anti-Energy’ Bill Is the Wrong Approach Today”

With jobs and economic recovery at stake, a climate change bill that adds costs and regulatory burdens to business is not logical, and the Senate might produce more thoughtful legislation that first protects the American economy and jobs.

The Senate also benefits from the parallel consideration of the energy bill sponsored by Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.). The American Clean Energy Leadership Act, while not perfect, does promote development of clean energy technologies, conservation and efficiency, and — critically for the manufacturing sector — calls for expanded production of domestic energy resources like natural gas and oil. It also contains vital language about upgrading the nation’s power grid.

If these principles and goals shape Senate consideration of a climate change bill, then we will come much closer to the debate Congress and the country should be having — that of a comprehensive national energy strategy that is cognizant of how our economy uses energy and the significant work already being done to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Yes, that’s just one bill. Three reams of paper, one H.R. 2454. Been meaning to get around to reading it.

Reuters, “Obama’s drive for climate change bill delayed“:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama’s push for quick action by Congress on climate change legislation suffered a setback on Thursday when the U.S. Senate committee leading the drive delayed work on the bill until September.

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer said her self-imposed deadline of early August for finishing writing a bill to combat global warming has been put off until after Congress returns from a recess that ends in early September.

“We’ll do it as soon as we get back” from that break, Boxer told reporters. Asked if this delay jeopardizes chances the Senate will pass a bill this year, Boxer said, “Not a bit … we’ll be in (session) until Christmas, so I’m not worried about it.”

Washington Post, “Senate panel delays action on climate change bill”

(Hat tip: Michelle Malkin)

P.S. Meanwhile, in Italy, eight leaders who have never heard of King Canute.

UPDATE (2:30 p.m.): Sen. Boxer shelved the cap-and-command-and-control-and-trade bill to deal with the Highway Trust Fund? So reports a blogger at Streetsblog, which supports “climate-friendly transportation.”

The highway account is expected to run dry in mid-August, sending Congress and the Obama administration scurrying to find $20 billion to keep state-level road projects funded until the end of 2010.

Boxer’s postponement of a climate debate in her committee may well be an acknowledgment of the challenge lawmakers are facing to rustle up that $20 billion by month’s end — especially given that House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) refusing to budge on his commitment to a new transportation bill this year.

If that’s the case, kudos to Senator Boxer. The need for a highway bill is pressing. It means jobs and improvements in infrastructure needed to keep our economy moving.

It’s just so interesting the things that are in H.R. 2454, the Waxman-Markey climate-government-business change bill. National building codes! More from NRO, The Corner:

Your Green House, Cont’d [Stephen Spruiell]

Jimmie Bise at the American Issues Project has a great follow-up on the cap-and-trade bill’s onerous home-retrofit mandates, which Kevin Williamson and I wrote about last week. Get this:

Pay close attention to (iii), (iv), and (vi) because those hit you right where you live. What that’s saying is the state will be empowered to inspect your home if you want to 1) renovate your house in any way that requires a building permit, 2) sell your house, or 3) change the name of the person responsible for any utility bill.

The bill enforces compliance by withholding tradable emissions allowances and other goodies from state governments until they crack down on the slackers. And once you comply with the directive to retrofit your home, the government reimburses you for no more than half of your expenses. Of course, the bill’s authors could make the argument that the nation’s biggest energy hogs don’t need the money.

Senators, read the bill!

From page 1225 of H.R. 2454, the Waxman-Markey legislation:

There’s bilateral aid, but there’s much more — largess from U.S. benefactors that will be funneled through less accountable (unaccountable) international agencies, as per page 1224:

(3) DISTRIBUTION THROUGH INTERNATIONAL FUND OR INSTITUTION.—If allowances are distributed to a multilateral fund or institution, as authorized in paragraph (1), the Secretary of State, or such other Federal agency head as the President may designate, shall seek to ensure the establishment and implementation of adequate mechanisms to….

Senators, read the bill! Somebody should.