Pelosi

It is official, Rep. Dingell and Rep. Boucher have dropped their effort to overrule California's tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions law, at least for now. Their proposal ran into the strong opposition from Speaker Pelosi, environmentalist and California elected officials. They had continued pushing the issue until yesterday, when they pulled it out of the energy bill currently under consideration in the House. SFChron:

The pair sent a memo on Monday to members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, saying they would soon release a final version of the Democratic energy bill that would not contain the proposal to pre-empt California and other states from their plan to cut greenhouse gases. Other contentious provisions also would be dropped, the lawmakers said.

"You will note that a number of the more controversial issues we raised, such as coal-to-liquid fuels, fuel economy standards, a low-carbon fuel standard, various mandates, and the role of federal and state programs, are not included," Dingell, the committee chairman, and Boucher wrote in the memo.

The low-carbon fuel standard was the one getting the most heat, though Obama's position on coal-to-liquid fuels has certainly been in the news. I am a little perplexed about the dropping of fuel economy standards from the discussion. The current standards are woefully inadequate and changing them has been a priority for the Democratic leadership.

Those issues will return -- perhaps for another clash -- as soon as this fall when Pelosi has said she wants the House to consider a more comprehensive global warming bill.

"This will also give us the needed time to achieve consensus on these issues if at all possible," Dingell and Boucher told their colleagues.

Oh goodie. Boy are they stubborn.

I am fairly certain that the pair will not be able to coalesce support around overriding California's law. Speaker Pelosi is in charge and her opposition will realistically leave little chance of its revival. They will surely try, but this may be the real end of the line for this proposal.

Rep. Boucher and Rep. Dingell had this bright idea, and when I mean bright I mean really dumb, to push forward new energy legislation that would have effectively overridden several pieces of landmark environmental law here in California. It would have prohibited states from passing "tougher-than-federal standards to cut vehicle emissions." The proposal seemed to deliberately target California.

Yesterday, the Chronicle published a high profile article on the legislation and by the end of the day, Pelosi put out a statement indicating her opposition. Chron

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, responding to pressure from California officials and environmentalists, has slapped down a new proposal by top House Democrats that would have wiped out California's ability to regulate greenhouse gases from cars and trucks.

In a brief but pointed statement Tuesday night, the San Francisco Democrat said, "Any proposal that affects California's landmark efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or eliminates the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions will not have my support."

There is no way that the proposal will reach the House floor. Good on the Speaker, looking out for California and the rest of the country. Now, if only the EPA would hurry up and grant California the waiver to regulate vehicle emissions.

Let's start off with the Republicans for once.

Fred Thompson, not to be confused with Tommy Thompson who has already declared, met with over 50 Republican House members about a potential run yesterday. He impressed the crowd and it is looking increasingly likely that he will run and fill the role of very conservative candidate.

This video of Romney at campaign events this week is worth a watch over at the WaPo. He mixes in comments about the tragedy at VT and taxes.

Joe Trippi announced that he joined John Edwards campaign today. He is working out of the headquarters as a senior advisor. Analysis here.

The schedule at the CDP for the presidential contenders speeches is changing. Clinton has now switched to Saturday afternoon.

Cute story on a kid who got to shake Obama's hand at the big Oakland rally, plus coverage of the MoveOn.org townhall on Iraq in the Sacramento News & Review.

The editor of the Prospect ponders the Democratic primary calendar, and puts forward an argument for a brokered convention. Unlikely for sure, but possible given the wide open field.

It is one step forward, one step back today on the labor front. On a more positive note, the House of Representatives just passed the Employee Free Choice Act 241-185. It faces a tough slog in the Senate and certain veto by Bush. However, the people's house just voted overwhelmingly to protect workers against harassment and intimidation.

California's own Rep. George Miller makes us proud with his closing remarks today. (h/t to the Gavel)

Like Nancy Scola says over at MyDD, this comes down to picking sides: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers or the workers? They have made it clear that they want win with fear and destroy collective bargaining.

History and recent events leave no doubt that there are those among us who really don't like unions. There are national interests committed to ripping the heart out of the labor movement. They want to, in the words of Grover Norquist, "to crush labor as a political entity" and eliminate unions. That's all that this debate is about. That's it. There are anti-union interest groups, union-busting law firms, there's an industry in this country of trying to cut the legs out from the labor movement. It's an undeniable part of the American political landscape. It has been as long as there have been unions.

There is a thriving industry designed to deny workers the ability to advocate for better working conditions. The Employee Free Choice Act would stop them in their tracks and create a much more open and accountable process.

And as Speaker Nancy Pelosi said during the debate:

The Employee Free Choice Act is the most important labor law reform legislation of this generation. But this legislation is about more than labor law: it is about basic labor rights, about the rule of the majority free from intimidation, and about protecting jobs.

It is a guarantee - when a majority of workers say they want a union, they will get a union.

Now the Senate will have to decide if they will support the workers or those who want to crush them. Free choice or threats and illegal firings? Do we respect worker's choices or show them contempt?

Happy V-day to everyone. There are a number of interesting things going on in the labor/political blogosphere today that simply need to be shared:

• Cheney declared today that Bush would veto the Employee Free Choice Act if it reaches his desk. That is disappointing, but not unsurprising. The Bush Administration has been virulently anti-labor. Think Progress has the video. AFL-CIO has even more here.
• Speaking of the Employee Free Choice Act...looks like some deep pocketed groups are joining together to try and defeat it.
• Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a new official blog up, run by Jesse Lee called The Gavel. It is really well done and should be a great resource in the coming months and years.
• A new health care coalition was just launched. Its OUR Health Care represents 8 million Californians. Frank Russo has a post up and Gary Passmore of the Congress of California Seniors has a second one on the CA Progress Report.
• Not directly blogging, but tech related. Villaraigosa wants citywide WiFi. Free WiFi would certainly improve the quality of life in LA, but how the deal is constructed is critical.