He didn't really IMO. He doesn't agree with the taxing of emissions at all, he's said specifically that he'd like to see that SC decision(from 07 I believe) to be overturned that said the gov. can and will regulate emissions. The bill isn't all cap and trade btw, it has some good stuff in it to protect the environment other than carbon capturing.

With cap and trade, it would cap carbon emissions of course, but to soften the blow of it on industries, the bill would provide coal-dependent companies with trade able emissions allowances. The original legislation would require those companies to buy the allowances at "auction", then that money goes to clean-coal energy research. What Boucher did was propose giving electric utilities 90% of those allowances they would be required to purchase, for free. Then on top of that, he'd introduce another bill to delay the regulations altogether for two years - there's not enough votes for a full ban, Obama would veto is regardless. Then during those two years, he and others in congress would try to work something permanent out in a compromise for the coal companies.

That second legislative measure is all assuming this even gets out of the Senate, which that isn't looking too good of happening.


Here's a good article that I read last month btw, didn't get around to posting it, but I found the link.

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/09/20/1...rylink=addthis