Michelle Malkin » Cap and tax liveblog: Democrats limit debate, stampede toward national energy tax

10:14am: Crikey. Sheila Jackson Lee is babbling about “getting the carbon out of the air.”
...
10:22am: Dem Rep. Quigley preaches cult of global warming science. Says there are no contrary studies.

Hoyer: "We'll have 218" climate bill votes - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

WASHINGTON, June 26, 2009 (AFP) - Democratic House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer predicted Friday that his party would have the 218 votes needed to ensure passage of historic legislation to battle global warming.

"We'll have the 218 votes," Hoyer told AFP in a telephone interview hours before lawmakers were to take up the sweeping bill between 3:00 pm and 4:00 pm (1900 GMT and 2000 GMT).

We expect that we will have the number of votes to pass the bill," Hoyer said. "We worked late yesterday and we're still working this morning. This is a very big piece of legislation and complex. Members are giving (it) a lot of thought."

Climate Bill Payoffs | Coyote Blog

The logic behind this farm offset provision is actually hilarious, as it undermines years of BS arguments by corn ethanol supporters. These ethanol supporters have argued, against the results of every study ever conducted outside of a state school in the corn belt, that the CO2 used in growing corn and processing it into ethanol is less than the CO2 absorbed by corn while growing.

But the argument of farmers in the recent climate bill is that farmers should be paid to do nothing (ie leave fields fallow) because this will reduce CO2 produced in growing the crops. But this is only the case if such CO2 in the production phase is larger than the CO2 absorbed from the crop’s growth. So if Waxman-Markey passes, we will have expensive energy provisions based on the assumption that Co2 used in crop production simultaneously both is and isn’t greater than CO2 absorbed in growth. Outstanding.