A major bill dealing with energy and climate in the US, a domestic priority of President Obama's, is bogged down in the US Senate with scant hope it would be completed by next month, giving the American president little to show in Copenhagen.
Even if he got a climate bill he would still have to get the Senate to ratify the international treaty, which they might still not do. Also, if the US goes to the conference with the climate bill already agreed, doesn't the US lose some bargaining power with, say, China? If you have already committed to something you cannot bargain on that commitment (which is why the EU is irrelevant - but at least we're not too guilty). En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
We could still see a dramatic last minute breakthrough in Copenhagen - and with Obama making concessions which are not even contained in the current bill struggling to gain any traction in Congress. The Senate (and Senate alone?) will then be asked to ratify a Treaty which will be an explicit test of loyalty to Obama and any failure to do so will have quantifiable downsides in the shape of the Treaty not coming into force and all other concessions made by other players coming off the table.
Obama could use his Nobel acceptance speech to make a Man on the moon in ten years type of stretching commitment for the US - IF the other major players come on board, and let the blame fall on others if they fail to do so. He will then only seek to ratify the Treaty in the Senate if other key Nations have signed up and the US- once again - is coming to be seen as the roadblock.
This has the advantage - for Obama - of putting the requirement for Senate ratification off for several months, at least, enabling him to deal with Healthcare and other contentious legislative issues first - and hopefully build momentum for his administration.
The problem with this strategy is that as the mid-terms get closer, his bed-wetting moderate wing of the party will get ever more jittery in the face of organised hostile industry led lobbying and advertising campaigns.
Somehow I'm still not convinced climate change is a tier 1 issue for Obama - one he would stake his Presidency on - unlike Healthcare, Guantanamo, Iraq, and perhaps Afghanistan. In fact, at the moment, it is unclear he has any tier 1 priorities other than staying in office... but let's not get too cynical and negative just yet! notes from no w here
I've not entirely lost hope for Copenhagen for exactly the reason you cite.
Blaming the Senate is a useful misdirection. The fact that it is also transparent makes me suspect Obama's commitment to achieving results. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
at the moment, it is unclear he has any tier 1 priorities other than staying in office... but let's not get too cynical and negative just yet!
