Waxman labors for cap-and-trade votes

House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman spent last week immersed in percentages — whether carbon emissions should drop 20 percent or 17 percent by 2020.

But starting Monday, the important number is 30 — the number of votes he needs to get his cap-and-trade bill out of committee.

{mosads}He spent last week peeling Democrats out of the “no” column and appears to have gotten within striking distance of that magic number.

Heading into a multi-day markup that starts at 1 p.m. Monday, the fate of the bill still rests in the hands of a sizable group of committee members who haven’t announced their position on the bill.

He’s expected to gain at least one more “yes” when the committee markup starts. Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) is expected to offer his endorsement of the bill, according to an aide.

Waxman (D-Calif.) can’t count on any support from the committee’s 23 Republicans, though Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.) has warned GOP leaders they can’t count on her as an automatic “no.”

If Bono Mack does come out against it, Waxman starts with 23 no votes. He can lose only six Democrats; if he loses more the bill fails.

Of course 31 votes would be much better than 30, so that no one member can be considered the deciding vote on a bill that will likely be the subject of some 2010 campaign advertisements. To get 31 votes, Waxman could lose only five.

Cap-and-trade supporters recently identified 17 committee Democrats who
would need to be persuaded to vote yes, with some needing more
convincing than others.

Since then four key swing votes — Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Rick Boucher (D-Va.), Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.) and Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) — negotiated a deal with Waxman on renewable electricity standards. Waxman also struck a deal with Dingell, chairman emeritus of the committee, on carbon allowances to the auto industry.

Dingell’s support is particularly important, as Waxman ousted him as chairman last fall and gained support from some who felt Dingell too critical of efforts to restrict climate change. For Waxman, Dingell’s support makes the bill look especially broad-based. And for Dingell to be able to support the bill prevents criticism that Waxman was right.

Also, Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), who was vice chairwoman of the committee under Dingell, is leaning toward voting for the bill, according to an aide.

Members still considered to be on the fence late last week included Reps. John Barrow (D-Ga.), Betty Sutton (D-Ohio), Jim Matheson (D-Utah) and Gene Green (D-Texas).

The votes of Matheson and Barrow could be particularly important for the bill even after it gets out of committee, as they are the chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the conservative Blue Dogs’ energy task force.

“Congressman Barrow has not seen the final bill yet,” a spokesperson told The Hill. “He is meeting with stakeholders who will be affected by this legislation and will make a decision based on what’s best for his constituents when the time comes. He takes this responsibility very seriously and is giving it the careful consideration it is due.”

Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) is leaning heavily toward supporting the bill, said spokeswoman Sharon Jenkins.

“He’s pretty much in,” she said, though she noted he has amendments intended to protect middle-class and lower-income electricity customers.

Attempts to reach several other key Democrats on the committee, including Reps. Bart Stupak of Michigan, Eliot Engel of New York, Charles Gonzalez of Texas, Charlie Melancon of Louisiana, Baron Hill of Indiana and Zack Space of Ohio, were unsuccessful.