Four questions that might help the U.S. Chamber get its story straight. Or, at least, consistent:
Does the U.S. Chamber consider emissions reduction targets and timetables to be essential to include or exclude from a climate bill?
If the U.S. Chamber thinks targets and timetables should be included, what does it believe should be the basis for setting emission reduction targets and timetables?
What emission reduction targets is the Chamber prepared to support and on what timetable?
When will the U.S. Chamber lay out an actual proposal for climate legislation?
Listen to an interview with NRDC on NPR's All Things Considered and Morning Edition:
Quit the U.S. Chamber Board over climate: Nike.
Refused to join the U.S. Chamber over climate: NRG Energy
Reduced payments to the U.S. Chamber over climate: Duke Energy
Companies that say the U.S. Chamber doesn't represent their views on climate: Johnson & Johnson, General Electric, Alcoa, Duke, Entergy, Microsoft, Royal Dutch Shell, Seventh Generation, Dow, PEPCO, Cisco Systems, Best Buy and small businesses in Minnesota, Colorado and Wisconsin.
Local Chambers distancing themselves from the U.S. Chamber: San Jose Chamber of Commerce, Greater New York Chamber of Commerce, Eastern Connecticut Chamber of Commerce, Boulder Chamber of Commerce, Seattle Chamber of Commerce, Aspen Chamber of Commerce.
Editorials and columns noting that the U.S. Chamber is damaging its reputation and credibility: BusinessWeek, PRWeek, Fortune Magazine's Marc Gunther, Newsweek, L.A. Times, Washington Post, Time, Marc Gunther (2nd story), Nashua Telegraph.
It can be tough to understand where the U.S. Chamber stands
on climate these days:
8/25/09 — U.S. Chamber senior staff tells the LA Times it seeks a "Scopes Monkey Trial" to question whether global warming poses a human health threat.
9/29/09 — The Chamber denies that "we deny the existence of any problem" and says its critics are "dead wrong" in a press release.
10/26/09 — U.S. Chamber President and CEO, Tom Donohue, tells Politico "Is the science [of global warming] right? Is the science not right? I don't know."
11/03/09 — The U.S. Chamber sends a letter to the Senate saying it "believes climate change is an important issue for this Congress to address" and commends "Senators Kerry and Graham for their recent [call for] comprehensive climate legislation."
11/03/09 — The U.S. Chamber later tweets that Congress should reject legislation with the "top-down approach of targets and timetables..."
11/06/09 — The U.S. Chamber insists its 11/03/09 letter articulates the Chamber's "position for the last two years and only represents a change to those who have willfully misrepresented it in the past" in a blog post by Bruce Josten, the letter's author.
Confused? So are we.