Who, exactly, is the House trying to protect? (You won't like the answer.)

In its latest fit of craziness, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the totally misnamed "Energy Consumers Relief Act" earlier this month, before leaving for August recess. (I wish I could say that I'll miss them while they're gone. But I won't -- not most of them, in any event.)

As most readers of PennFuture blogs will know, for more than a decade, Congress has been unable or unwilling to pass legislation to limit carbon pollution. President Obama took things into his own hands (as required by law) by announcing his climate plan in June.

So what did the fossil-fuel-loving science deniers in the House feel compelled to do? Pass a ridiculous bill that would restrict the government's ability to enact environmental regulations.

One wonders who the 232 House members who voted for this measure are actually trying to protect. They are apparently unaware that our landmark environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act have actually saved consumers a great deal of money, while protecting their health.

PennFuture was especially sorry to read that Rep. Tim Murphy from southwestern Pa. made sure that the bill would require Congressional approval for the government to use "cost of carbon" valuation to calculate risks based on climate impacts.  Mr. Murphy seems more concerned with protecting coal's bottom line than his constituents' health -- or their wallets, for that matter.

As usual in this Congress, it's up to the Senate to stop this crazy bill from becoming law. Unfortunately, we're pretty sure that Sen. Pat Toomey will side with big industry and vote the wrong way, but we are pulling for Sen. Bob Casey to truly protect the citizens of Pennsylvania.

Hey, Sen. Toomey -- if you prove me wrong and vote against this bill, I'll sing your praises to all my friends and colleagues. I promise!

(Click here to see how the rest of the Pa. delegation voted. No surprises, alas.)