Roll Call: Latest News on Capitol Hill, Congress, Politics and Elections
March 28, 2015

Climate Change All-Night Session Set for Monday

(Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call File Photo)

(Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call File Photo)

Senate Democrats are about to burn the midnight oil to make their case on climate change.

The previously rumored all-night session on the effects of climate change will take place Monday, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse confirmed.

“It’s locked in,” the Rhode Island Democrat told CQ Roll Call. “An all-nighter is an all-nighter. We’re going to go all the way through to eight or nine in the morning or whenever they need to clean it up for the next day.”

That would clearly meet the established definition of an all-night session.

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, and Whitehouse are coordinating the campaign.

Whitehouse has given weekly floor speeches when the Senate’s been in session for well over a year now, a series he’s dubbed “Time to Wake Up.”

The Rhode Islander is also heading to Iowa, where he wants environmental policy to be an issue at the state’s key caucuses in 2016, the Des Moines Register reported.

  • windy2

    Dems gathering in the dark of night to participate in climate séance. Crystal balls are mandatory.

  • Huckfunn

    A couple of questions for these morons:

    1. When has the climate NOT changed?

    2. The climate is changing from what to what? Don’t tell me it’s getting warmer. There has been no warming for 17.5 years.

    • Leslie Graham

      Exactly right – every time CO2 levels rise the climate changes
      Always has – always will.
      Simple schoolboy physics.
      The warming has accelerated over the last 17 years. You are looking at the one graph of surface only temperatures that doesn’t even include the more rapidly warming Arctic. and picking the Super El Nino temperature spike as your start point is such an obvious attempt at deception that it’s basicaly an insult to any intelligent reader.
      And the link you provided is to a notorious disinformation site.
      You really have made yourself look silly havn’t you.
      There is NO ‘debate’ about this in the scientific community and there hasn’t been for decades. You have been systematicaly lied to by vested interestswho stand to lose six trillion dollars in stranded assets unless they can convince enough gullible dupes that climate change isn’t happening.

      • MichaelDSmith

        No, Leslie, the rate of warming in the system is essentially zero. The only place you can find some is in the ocean. If that is included, you’re talking 0.5W/m^2. This imbalance, if left active forever, could raise temperatures 0.13°C total (which is not different from zero, really). So the system is at equilibrium now. 0.5W/m^2, the measured value, indicates that sensitivity is about 12x less than the climate models would predict. THAT is how bad they are, the’re not even accurate to an order of magnitude.

        The $6 Trillion is peanuts compared to what the cost will be to the dead people the activists will have die by their misanthropic energy policies. Ask the 30,000 dead Britons what they think about $6 Trillion.

      • m1shu

        Aren’t those who constantly point out the graph from 1980 (hint, hint) to 1998, clutching at a graph as well? It’s pathetic that the warmists point to the scientific community who of course agree that CO2 traps heat, yet at the same time try to conveniently ignore the scientists models repeated failures to predict how much warming there will be in 100 years. They keep predicting 4, 5, 9 degrees warmer! The reality is showing that we’re on pace to be one degree warmer. Oh noes!

      • guesswhodrews

        The warming has accelerated over the last 17 years.

        The only place warming has accelerated over the last 17 years is in climate models. Fortunately, the models are wrong.

      • JimB

        Leslie: Can you read a temp/CO2 chart? Look carefully…the CO2 LAGS the temperature increase. Astounding.

    • DavidKramer

      You really want to flip out a globalist climate acolyte? Ask them what is the perfect climate situation and when has it ever happened……..

  • Randy Breitbart

    Democrats – Why not instead meet up at Al Gore’s mansion? It’s huge, warm, and well lit (he was running $30,000 in yearly electric bills). After the midterms there will be plenty of room for any remaining Democrat senators to convene on Al’s 100ft houseboat.

    • independencemp3

      every Democrat should have their cpu made public!

  • MNHawk

    Why doesn’t the coward just man up, and introduce that bill massively raising taxes on energy?

    Why are all Democrats such utter cowards?

    • russedav

      Dems & the GOP, few to none being men of principle, the real reason for the disastrous 19th Amendment family disintegration/ruination, no real men to stand up in opposition, or infinitely more importantly to be the husband and father God demands, for which we suffer, just cowardly bail outs like WI’s fleebaggers. Ironically Dems are more courageous to stand for evil than the GOP is to stand for principled rectitude. Look at their leaderless leadership Bonehead and Mc Con Man who would have been gotten rid of by a party of principle. No danger of that. I pray AR’s Pryor doesn’t find an evil way to defeat Cotton since the traitor won’t stop him on the merits; maybe then Tom will be able to mount a defeat of McConman if Bevin is defeated by the treasonous establishment McConman and his RINOs.

      • NavyBlue1962

        Boy,have you got it right.

  • Scott Tate

    Won’t an all-nighter use extra electricity and increase the Dem’s carbon footprint? How irresponsible!

    • Scott Tate

      Burning all that extra midnight oil! There will certainly be warming inside the chamber with all the hot air expelled …

      • Leslie Graham

        Oh how funny – what a thigh-slapper of a comment. And soooo original.
        Now do you have anything intelligent to say about the fact that climate change is now simply an everyday reality all over the world?

        • Scott Tate

          Climate change happens all the time – over long periods of time and shorter periods – stating that it is now an “everyday reality” is 100% beside the point of the discussion. Will climate change cause catastrophic problems in the future? That is the question and anyone who gives a definitive “yes” to that question is either woefully uninformed or deliberately dishonest.

        • guesswhodrews

          Except it isn’t. 17 years with no statistically significant warming much less the .2 degrees per decade the climate models forecast. And no there is no increase in storms, floods, droughts, etc. that the warmists want you to believe. What you are calling climate change is actually known as weather.

        • journeymananalyst

          Dear Leslie,

          No high school juniors have experienced ANY increase in global temps in their lifetime. If the current trend continues, as many scientists believe, there will soon be no young adults that can be convinced that global warming is real. Only old fuddy duddies will be able to recall the glory days of rising global temps.

    • russedav

      Calling Dems irresponsible is redundant, though there are always exceptions, the few unsung heroes who even today stand against the party Leviathan, usually not in the limelight, the Dem double standard of praising opposition to Bush and decrying it for the 0bamanation for without double standards they’d have none!

  • Russell Cook

    And we can pretty much assume party-crashers such as Senators Inhofe, Barrasso and Vitter will be barred from attending. Such is the hallmark of the man-caused global warming crowd, debate is not allowed, and never has been in the 20 year history of the Al Gore era.

  • Cliff Forbes

    Senator Sheldon Dumbass

  • ShadrachSmith

    Was it Hansen or Mann who predicted no more snow in England…ever…and he showed us a hockey stick graph to prove CO2 is Killer #1. And also there was that polar bear picture.

    The theories are clear enough, If the CO2 spikes the world will end in a fiery ball, but the reality is that CO2 increased something like 15% in the last 50 years while the climate has remained remarkably stable this last decade or two. And if that part of your theory isn’t true…If the hockey stick prediction is simply false…

    Some reasonable people have stopped believing Warmists ever had that CO2 thing right. So why are we making all these rules about CO2? Why are we even still enforcing the old ones? To what purpose?

    • Leslie Graham

      No – no-one ever predicted no more snow in England ever.
      What was projected was increasingly extreme weather events such as drought and floods.
      And surprise surprise – this winter we have had the heaviest rainfall ever recorded in records that go back 248 years.
      What an amazing coincidence.
      While you’re here, and seeing as you think you know something that thirty thousand climate scientists have missed in over a century of reseach, could you please explain how the metlting of 75% of Arctic sea ice volume in the last 35 years can possibly NOT have some kind of effect on the regional weather.

      • ShadrachSmith

        What convinced you that CO2 controls the climate?

        • JJM108

          A simple thing called SCIENCE.

          • ShadrachSmith

            What particular part of science? Was it the hockey stick graph, or the polar bear picture. Do you know what percentage of the atmosphere is CO2? Is that part of your science knowledge?

      • tmitsss

        Britain’s winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.

        Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain’s culture, as warmer winters – which scientists are attributing to global climate change – produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.

    • rusty57

      I believe “Hockey Stick” Mann lost a court battle recently. After suing for libel, he STILL wouldn’t produce his data or his science. “Fraud” will now stick.

      • tmitsss

        Mann has not lost his Canadian suit yet, but he has not produced his data.

  • NavyBlue1962

    I hope the good people of Kentucky show McConnell the door. He’s running hard to the right now with his phoney “holding a rifle” stunt and all this other B.S. because the polls show him running behind his challenger who is a true conservative. As far as the global warming scam the people should demand the government stop wasting their tax money on such foolishness.

  • Leslie Graham

    Antarctica is losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

    Between 1992 and 2001, ice was melting from the two main ice sheets at a rate of about 64 billion tonnes a year.

    From 2002 to 2011, the ice sheets were melting at a rate of about 362 billion tonnes a year – an almost six-fold increase.
    Simple, observable, measurable fact.

    The temporary winter SEA ICE extent maximum is increasing by about 1.5% per decade (as projected) as a result of the warming southern oceans increasing the hydrological cycle by around 4%, the freshwater run-off from 362 billion tons per year of melting ice – (which, of course, tends to ‘float’ on top of the more saline water and freezes and freezes at a lower temperature) plus an increase in katabatic winds from the interior (due to ozone depletion) spreading the resulting increase in surface ice further out.
    Also the increase in snowfall helps to insulate the frozen freshwater ice once it has formed.
    The surface water around Antarctica has been freshening since the 1950’s, which is why climate scientists projected the current increase in temporary winter sea ice extent decades ago.

    Even the denier’s favourite Judith Curry has published research confirming this phenomena.

    “…The observed sea surface temperature in the Southern Ocean shows a substantial warming trend for the second half of the 20th century. Associated with the warming, there has been an enhanced atmospheric hydrological cycle in the Southern Ocean that results in an increase of the Antarctic sea ice for the past three decades through the reduced upward ocean heat transport and increased snowfall…
    … the increased heating from below (ocean) and above (atmosphere) and increased liquid precipitation associated with the enhanced hydrological cycle results in a projected [long term] decline of the Antarctic sea ice….”

    So every time some gullible climatestupid squawks “Antarctic ice is growing” and “Polly wants a cracker” (which happens about 1,000 times a day) they merely self identify as getting their disinformation from a denierblog.
    You really need to read up on at least the schoolboy basics if you are going to presume to understand Antarctic ice dynamics better than the hundreds of scientists who study it full time.

    Antarctica is losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

    Simple, observable, measurable fact.

  • NavyBlue1962

    Global warming is a scam. Nothing more than another lie by liberals to control the people. This country is now filled with lemmings who outnumber those who think for themselves. If anyone remembers we had an ice age prediction in the early 70’s. I’m glad it came because it killed all the killer bees coming up from Mexico to sting us to death. Eighty percent of the world’s carbon emissions are coming out of Red China so Obama needs to parachute in and kick that paper-hanging Xi Jinping’s butt. I mean, he parachuted in and took out bin Laden who died of kidney failure in the Tora Bora mountains in 2002 so why not do the same with China’s president? Problem solved.

  • conservativechick

    Why are Democrats wasting so much time on a theory that’s been so thoroughly debunked?

  • independencemp3

    The green money trail is growing cold…

  • rusty57

    There is one reason RI sux to do business in. It’s Warmista Senator.

  • aeroguy48

    Cold is to return to the Northeast mid-week so the dems need to hurry and grab the money!

  • queensborn

    It appears to me that AGW alarmists are crying crocodile
    tears because they can’t seem to get their message out to the general populace.
    A recent poll sited by one of the AGW web sites (climate skeptic) showed that
    the general population thinks that 55% of scientists agree on AGW. The actual
    number claimed by the site is 97%; some say 100%, a number that is fraught with all sorts of deception. In reality the range of opinions on the significance of
    man’s contribution to GW differs considerably from insignificant to highly
    significant. You see how that game is played.

    If the alarmists really want to ring the clarion call for
    climate action, then they should dissociate themselves form the Al Gore’s and
    other politicians who’s attempt at messaging only creates greater doubt as to
    the integrity of the claim. Or for that matter, Hollywood celebs, like Mr.
    Wizard. Goodness, every time Mr. Wizard gets on TV to debate, he looks like
    he’s lost with little command of the facts.

    Additionally, stop the attempts to silence skeptics. There happen to be a multitude of scientists in that camp, who are legitimately questioning scientific methods and interpretations. And, for the record,
    deflecting all contrarian views on AGW to the evil oil empire or the nefarious
    Koch brothers does nothing to persuade public opinion.
    Number one, it just reinforces that there is something afoot. As Shakespeare wrote, thou protest too much
    Number two, the amount of resources received for studying GW under the supposition that anthropogenic effects are the primary or only driver worth investigating, is magnitudes higher than taking the contrarian or objective approach.

    It just seems if you want to ruin the credibility of the skeptic’s argument, debate scientist to scientist. Perhaps the weepy, Dr Mann can show his methodology of how he grafted tree ring temperature data from past
    centuries onto the more contemporary means of deriving temperature
    measurements. Have him explain why he didn’t continue with the same
    methodology. Is it because the Hockey Stick went flat? There is a legion of
    other questions to be asked, but I think we instinctively know why a public
    discourse at such a level, would be risky.

    In the spirit of curiosity, maybe congress should sponsor the event. You would have an opportunity to present the next Scopes trial…If only our political leadership had that kind of objectivity integrity.

  • queensborn

    Leslie Graham, Your post is misleading and inaccurate. From the NIPCC
    recent report:

    Antarctica covers 14 million km2 in area, is 98
    percent covered by glacial ice that averages 2.4 km in
    thickness, corresponds to 90 percent of the world’s
    ice, and represents about 70 percent of the world’s
    fresh water. Melting all Antarctic ice would raise sea
    level by about 72 m. The average daily temperatures
    at the South Pole and Vostock, respectively, are –
    49.4° C and -55.1° C. In order to melt any significant
    amount of Antarctic ice, temperatures would have to
    rise above the melting point of 0° C. This is not
    happening now, nor is it likely to happen soon. The
    main (east) Antarctic ice sheet has been cooling since
    1957 and ice accumulation is increasing rather than
    decreasing. For the same period, since 1957, warming
    and ice melting have occurred along the West
    Antarctic Peninsula, which represents 13 percent of
    Antarctic Ice. This melting may have an
    oceanographic rather than a meteorological cause.
    So far as we are able to measure it accurately, the

    Antarctic ice mass is effectively stable on the short
    historic (meteorological) time scale. On the longerterm
    climatic scale, Antarctic and nearby ice volume
    has fluctuated in parallel with millennial-scale climate
    variability, including ice shrinkage during the
    Medieval Warm Period to positions that have not
    been attained again today.

    Three facts confirm the likely modern stability of
    the East Antarctic Ice Sheet: (1) the late twentieth
    century global warming expected to melt the icecap
    lay well within the bounds of natural variation and
    has now ceased; (2) were warming to resume, the
    probable regional response would be enhanced
    moisture flow into the icecap interior, leading to
    increased snowfall and ice accumulation; and (3)
    despite the past few interglacials being up to 5O C
    warmer than was the Holocene, sediment cores
    adjacent to Antarctica provide no evidence for any
    dramatic breakups of the WAIS over the past few
    glacial cycles.

    Satellite-mounted sensors document a growth in both
    pack ice and fast ice across the East Antarctic region
    since 1979. Between 1979 and 2008, sea ice increased
    in area by about half a million square kilometers: a 2–
    3 percent increase during winter and spring and a 5–7
    percent increase during summer. Thus the recent
    trend toward decreasing sea ice in the Arctic since
    1979 has been counterbalanced by increasing sea ice
    in Antarctica, for a net result of little overall change
    in global sea-ice area.

    This result is not consistent with the climate

    models that project high latitude warming and

    decreases in polar sea-ice in both hemispheres.

  • unclebarb

    Let them waste their time on the made up and silly climate scam. Everybody can laugh their butts off and go to bed while the clowns do an all nighter for a phony issue.

  • gthog61

    This idiots are engaging in an open attack on the economy but they care about the little people.

  • twmmd

    Anyone who listens or agrees with the distortions and lies from Gore deserve everything coming to them…..seems the dem party have one thing in common….start a lie and deception and continue to tell it until you have said it so many times you yourself begin to believe it….unfortunately for climate change as we have seen with Obamacare the facts that climate change and Obamacare fall into the same fantasy and distortion of reality and are VERY EXPENSIVE with money flowing as desired thru dem operatives and taxpayers on the hook for all this wanton excess and wealth transfer to dem operatives……Obama, the current dems in Congress and these climate change sharletons all have in common a massive scam and other people’s money wasted on a massive scale.

  • Rick Caird

    Hmmm, how many Senators does it take for a quorum call?

  • JimB

    Taking a page from the democrats (who turned off the air conditioning to make sure everyone was swetting the last time), how about opening the windows and turning off the heat during this “debate”?

  • Nightwatch

    The world sneers at you.

  • Glenn Madison

    From the USA Today article: “The Democratic effort is cause for some confusion because these senators are calling for action in a chamber they control but without any specific legislation to offer up for a vote, or any timetable for action this year.”


  • ojfl

    I for one will be glued to C-SPAN… Now what is the number of the legislation attached to this effort? When will it be brought up in the Senate for an up and down vote? Has it been voted in committee?

  • bittman

    Four things bother me about the Global Warming scheme the Progressives want to sell to Americans: (1) Many of the Global warming supporters were Ice Age supporters in the 1970’s which makes it appear that they have a hidden agenda (e.g., global control?); (2) the East Anglia University hacker proved the world-renown global warming scientists were not even following the very basic Scientific Method of conducting research (i.e.,the one that is taught in the 6th or 7th grade science courses–if not earlier); (3) tremendous amounts of monies have been spent internationally and in the USA on “green” energy research with little or no positive results; and (4) most of the contracts/grants issued by the DOE under the Obama Administration have enriched Obama donors at great expense to the American taxpayers with little to show for it.

Sign In

Forgot password?



Receive daily coverage of the people, politics and personality of Capitol Hill.

Subscription | Free Trial

Logging you in. One moment, please...