Congressman,

From what I've read, the final bill addressing global warming had been seriously altered and watered down from the original. Focusing only on the petroleum economy when making important decisions will not help solve our problems. Long range solutions are what we need at this most important time. If we don't get serious about global warming, there just might not be jobs for any of us in the future.

Dennis Kucinich voted against it.  Here's  his justification:

"“It sets targets that are too weak, especially in the short term, and sets about meeting those targets through Enron-style accounting methods. It gives new life to one of the primary sources of the problem that should be on its way out– coal – by giving it record subsidies. And it is rounded out with massive corporate giveaways at taxpayer expense. There is $60 billion for a single technology which may or may not work, but which enables coal power plants to keep warming the planet at least another 20 years."   https://deadlinelive.info/2009/06/27/dennis-kucinich-lays-out-why-he-voted-against-clean-energy-act/

 Oldbridge, You might be interested in what Tom Friedman had to say about this in the NY Times today:

"There is much in the House cap-and-trade energy bill that just passed that I absolutely hate. It is too weak in key areas and way too complicated in others. A simple, straightforward carbon tax would have made much more sense than this Rube Goldberg contraption. It is pathetic that we couldn’t do better. It is appalling that so much had to be given away to polluters. It stinks. It’s a mess. I detest it. Now let’s get it passed in the Senate and make it law."

www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/opinion/01friedman.html