Thomas Friedman thinks the House cap-and-trade bill stinks

"It is too weak in key areas and way too complicated in others," the 3-time Pulitzer Prize winner states in his July 1st column.

Despite this, he still says, "let's get it passed in the Senate and make it law.

"Why? Because, for all its flaws, this bill is the first comprehensive attempt by American to mitigate climate change by putting a price on carbon emissions. Rejecting this bill would have been read in the world as America voting against the reality and urgency of climate and would have undermined clean energy initiatives everywhere."

Additionally, it would change the attitudes among "consumers, investors, farmers, innovators and entrepreneurs that in time will make a big difference - much like the first warnings that cigarettes could cause cancer. The morning after that warning no one ever looked at smoking the same again.

"Ditto if this bill passes."

However, the bill must be improved before voting in the Senate. Or at least not be diluted any further.

He blames three parties for the current weakness of the bill:

"The Republican Party, President Barak Obama and We the People."

The framers of the bill, Reps. Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, wanted it to be weak.

"'They had to make the compromises they did,' said Dan Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign, 'because almost every House Republican voted against the bill and did nothing to try to improve it. So to get it passed, they needed every coal-state Democrat, and that meant they had to water it down to bring them on board.'"

Which, to Friedman, begs the question:

"Does the GOP want to be the party of sex scandals and polluters or does it want to be a partner in helping America dominate the next global industry: ET - energy technology?"

In the past, however, Republicans have been environmental leaders. Teddy Roosevelt inaugurated the national park system and Richard Nixon gave us the Clean Air Act and the EPA. Even Daddy Bush signed the 1993 Rio Treaty preserving biodiversity.

While the 17 percent reduction of US carbon emissions by 2017 is not enough to mitigate climate change, it will insure that new buildings and appliances are energy efficient and were are able to keep the Amazonian forests preserved and intact.

Obama needs to do more as well.

"If he is not ready to risk failure by going all out, failure will be the most likely result."

He also instructs younger Americans to do more if they want to make a difference:

"Get out of Facebook and into somebody's face. Play hardball or not at all."

I guess I'll go ride my bike and picket Senator John Cornyn's local office instead of updating my status as I had originally planned. Except, thanks to global warming, its dangerously hot to be on a bike mid-afternoon in suburban Houston.

Ah, the dilemma.