Big Green and little green clash over the American Power Act

[ProSense]

Big Green and little green clash over the American Power Act

<...>

Two hundred groups that might be called "little green" immediately condemned the climate and energy bill in a joint letter, calling it "greenwashing in the extreme." The coalition consists of regional environmental, peace, and religious groups -- such as Don't Waste Arizona, the Snake River Alliance, and the Turtle Island Restoration Network.

"This bill is just business-as-usual: taxpayer giveaways to giant nuclear and other energy corporations wrapped in the guise of doing something about our climate crisis," they wrote.

Big Green issued its own statement the same morning. It was neither an endorsement nor an attack on the bill. It was thoroughly -- impressively -- devoid of any clear opinion of the bill.

<...>

This is far from the first inter-movement dispute among green groups. Last fall I reported on a "no compromise" faction of liberal groups that attacked Al Gore, the Waxman-Markey House bill, and carbon markets that allow polluters to buy and sell emissions credits. They argued that larger environmental groups had given away too much in collaborating with businesses and Democratic lawmakers. Reps from EDF, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Center for American Progress found this, shall we say, annoying.

more

[Kolesar]

1. Sierra Club, Environmental Defense, and Defenders are grassroots groups

There is no "wah" in action
Leaning forward: Why the American Power Act is worth fighting for

http://www.grist.org/article/2010-05-17-leaning-forward-why-the-american-power-act-is-worth-fighting-for/
Excerpt: So is it worth doing? Is the bill worth fighting for with the kind of passion that was brought to health care or even the presidential election?

I believe the answer to that question is an absolute, unqualified, overwhelming yes. However flawed and inadequate, Kerry's bill would represent a sea change in American life. It would lend desperately needed momentum to the global fight against climate change. Failure would be a tragedy and passage a huge, vital victory.

I know many of my fellow travelers on the left disagree. Some have convinced themselves that not only is the bill flawed, it's worse than passing nothing at all; many others view it with distaste or resignation. Both left and right have attacked the bill relentlessly since its inception in the House, and for the vast muddled middle the lesson has been simple: if both sides hate it, it must not be worth supporting. A climate bill has come to Congress and it has almost no passionate supporters.

Nevertheless, the fact remains: It's overwhelmingly important to pass the damn thing. I'll argue as much in my next few posts, but to begin with I want to emphasize two reasons we ought to have an overwhelming bias toward immediate action, even compromised, inadequate action. One is physical, one political.