Changes

The "'''Climate Security Act'''" (S2191), sponsored by Barbara Boxer (D-CA)<ref>http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.03036:</ref> and styled after a previous bill sponsored by [[Joe Lieberman]] (I-CT) and [[John Warner]] (R-VA), is a proposed law that would implement a [[cap-and-trade]] system for [[greenhouse gas]]es in the [[manufacturing]], [[transportation]], and [[power]] sectors, with the intention of curbing anthropogenic [[global warming]].  Under the proposed system, companies would be able to expel certain amounts of greenhouse gases up to a quota, after which they could purchase credits to increase their quota from other companies.  The intention of the bill is thus to employ market forces and make [[environment]]al consciousness of greenhouse gases into a profitable endeavor, as the environmentally successful companies would be at a strategic advantage in the marketplace.

The "'''Climate Security Act'''" (S2191), sponsored by Barbara Boxer (D-CA)<ref>http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s.03036:</ref> and styled after a previous bill sponsored by [[Joe Lieberman]] (I-CT) and [[John Warner]] (R-VA), is a proposed law that would implement a [[cap-and-trade]] system for [[greenhouse gas]]es in the [[manufacturing]], [[transportation]], and [[power]] sectors, with the intention of curbing anthropogenic [[global warming]].  Under the proposed system, companies would be able to expel certain amounts of greenhouse gases up to a quota, after which they could purchase credits to increase their quota from other companies.   

Critics of the bill believe it would increase government bureaucracy needlessly, since it contains provisions for four additional government entities to administer the bill's intent, and that the law would not effectively address the issue of climate change.  Patrick Michaels of the [[Cato Institute]] has said that the bill is "going to cost trillions and do nothing measurable about [[climate change]] in the foreseeable future."<ref name=pmtrill> [http://www.cato.org/pressroom.php?display=ncomments&id=34 Cato Scholar Comments on Warner-Lieberman Climate Security Act] - May 30, 2008 - [[Patrick J. Michaels]], senior fellow in environmental studies</ref>

Critics of the bill believe it would increase government bureaucracy needlessly, since it contains provisions for four additional government entities to administer the bill's intent, and that the law would not effectively address the issue of climate change.  Patrick Michaels of the [[Cato Institute]] has said that the bill is "going to cost trillions and do nothing measurable about [[climate change]] in the foreseeable future."<ref name=pmtrill> [http://www.cato.org/pressroom.php?display=ncomments&id=34 Cato Scholar Comments on Warner-Lieberman Climate Security Act] - May 30, 2008 - [[Patrick J. Michaels]], senior fellow in environmental studies</ref>