Today, former Vice President Al Gore accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Norway. The speech he delivered was powerful, beautifully composed, and on mark in every way.  Watch his acceptance speech at http://blog.algore.com/2007/12/nobel_prize_acceptance_speech.html.

This is a clarion call for all of us.

SPEECH BY AL GORE ON THE ACCEPTANCE

OF THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

DECEMBER 10, 2007

OSLO, NORWAY

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Honorable members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen.

I have a purpose here today. It is a purpose I have tried to serve for many years. I have prayed that God would show me a way to accomplish it.

Sometimes, without warning, the future knocks on our door with a precious and painful vision of what might be. One hundred and nineteen years ago, a wealthy inventor read his own obituary, mistakenly published years before his death. Wrongly believing the inventor had just died, a newspaper printed a harsh judgment of his life’s work, unfairly labeling him "The Merchant of Death" because of his invention – dynamite. Shaken by this condemnation, the inventor made a fateful choice to serve the cause of peace.

Seven years later, Alfred Nobel created this prize and the others that bear his name.

Seven years ago tomorrow, I read my own political obituary in a judgment that seemed to me harsh and mistaken – if not premature. But that unwelcome verdict also brought a precious if painful gift: an opportunity to search for fresh new ways to serve my purpose.

Unexpectedly, that quest has brought me here. Even though I fear my words cannot match this moment, I pray what I am feeling in my heart will be communicated clearly enough that those who hear me will say, "We must act."

The distinguished scientists with whom it is the greatest honor of my life to share this award have laid before us a choice between two different futures – a choice that to my ears echoes the words of an ancient prophet: "Life or death, blessings or curses. Therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live."

We, the human species, are confronting a planetary emergency – a threat to the survival of our civilization that is gathering ominous and destructive potential even as we gather here. But there is hopeful news as well: we have the ability to solve this crisis and avoid the worst – though not all – of its consequences, if we act boldly, decisively and quickly.

However, despite a growing number of honorable exceptions, too many of the world’s leaders are still best described in the words Winston Churchill applied to those who ignored Adolf Hitler’s threat: "They go on in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful to be impotent."

So today, we dumped another 70 million tons of global-warming pollution into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding our planet, as if it were an open sewer. And tomorrow, we will dump a slightly larger amount, with the cumulative concentrations now trapping more and more heat from the sun.

As a result, the earth has a fever. And the fever is rising. The experts have told us it is not a passing affliction that will heal by itself. We asked for a second opinion. And a third. And a fourth. And the consistent conclusion, restated with increasing alarm, is that something basic is wrong.

We are what is wrong, and we must make it right.

Last September 21, as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is "falling off a cliff." One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study, to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week, warns it could happen in as little as 7 years.

Seven years from now.

In the last few months, it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter. Major cities in North and South America, Asia and Australia are nearly out of water due to massive droughts and melting glaciers. Desperate farmers are losing their livelihoods. Peoples in the frozen Arctic and on low-lying Pacific islands are planning evacuations of places they have long called home. Unprecedented wildfires have forced a half million people from their homes in one country and caused a national emergency that almost brought down the government in another. Climate refugees have migrated into areas already inhabited by people with different cultures, religions, and traditions, increasing the potential for conflict. Stronger storms in the Pacific and Atlantic have threatened whole cities. Millions have been displaced by massive flooding in South Asia, Mexico, and 18 countries in Africa. As temperature extremes have increased, tens of thousands have lost their lives. We are recklessly burning and clearing our forests and driving more and more species into extinction. The very web of life on which we depend is being ripped and frayed.

We never intended to cause all this destruction, just as Alfred Nobel never intended that dynamite be used for waging war. He had hoped his invention would promote human progress. We shared that same worthy goal when we began burning massive quantities of coal, then oil and methane.

Even in Nobel’s time, there were a few warnings of the likely consequences. One of the very first winners of the Prize in chemistry worried that, "We are evaporating our coal mines into the air." After performing 10,000 equations by hand, Svante Arrhenius calculated that the earth’s average temperature would increase by many degrees if we doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

Seventy years later, my teacher, Roger Revelle, and his colleague, Dave Keeling, began to precisely document the increasing CO2 levels day by day.

But unlike most other forms of pollution, CO2 is invisible, tasteless, and odorless -- which has helped keep the truth about what it is doing to our climate out of sight and out of mind. Moreover, the catastrophe now threatening us is unprecedented – and we often confuse the unprecedented with the improbable.

We also find it hard to imagine making the massive changes that are now necessary to solve the crisis. And when large truths are genuinely inconvenient, whole societies can, at least for a time, ignore them. Yet as George Orwell reminds us: "Sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield."

In the years since this prize was first awarded, the entire relationship between humankind and the earth has been radically transformed. And still, we have remained largely oblivious to the impact of our cumulative actions.

Indeed, without realizing it, we have begun to wage war on the earth itself. Now, we and the earth’s climate are locked in a relationship familiar to war planners: "Mutually assured destruction."

More than two decades ago, scientists calculated that nuclear war could throw so much debris and smoke into the air that it would block life-giving sunlight from our atmosphere, causing a "nuclear winter." Their eloquent warnings here in Oslo helped galvanize the world’s resolve to halt the nuclear arms race.

Now science is warning us that if we do not quickly reduce the global warming pollution that is trapping so much of the heat our planet normally radiates back out of the atmosphere, we are in danger of creating a permanent "carbon summer."

As the American poet Robert Frost wrote, "Some say the world will end in fire; some say in ice." Either, he notes, "would suffice."

But neither need be our fate.  It is time to make peace with the planet.

We must quickly mobilize our civilization with the urgency and resolve that has previously been seen only when nations mobilized for war. These prior struggles for survival were won when leaders found words at the 11th hour that released a mighty surge of courage, hope and readiness to sacrifice for a protracted and mortal challenge.

These were not comforting and misleading assurances that the threat was not real or imminent; that it would affect others but not ourselves; that ordinary life might be lived even in the presence of extraordinary threat; that Providence could be trusted to do for us what we would not do for ourselves.

No, these were calls to come to the defense of the common future. They were calls upon the courage, generosity and strength of entire peoples, citizens of every class and condition who were ready to stand against the threat once asked to do so.  Our enemies in those times calculated that free people would not rise to the challenge; they were, of course, catastrophically wrong.

Now comes the threat of climate crisis – a threat that is real, rising, imminent, and universal. Once again, it is the 11th hour. The penalties for ignoring this challenge are immense and growing, and at some near point would be unsustainable and unrecoverable. For now we still have the power to choose our fate, and the remaining question is only this: Have we the will to act vigorously and in time, or will we remain imprisoned by a dangerous illusion?

Mahatma Gandhi awakened the largest democracy on earth and forged a shared resolve with what he called "Satyagraha" – or "truth force."

In every land, the truth – once known – has the power to set us free.

Truth also has the power to unite us and bridge the distance between "me" and "we," creating the basis for common effort and shared responsibility.

There is an African proverb that says, "If you want to go quickly, go alone. If you want to go far, go together." We need to go far, quickly.

We must abandon the conceit that individual, isolated, private actions are the answer. They can and do help. But they will not take us far enough without collective action. At the same time, we must ensure that in mobilizing globally, we do not invite the establishment of ideological conformity and a new lock-step "ism."

  That means adopting principles, values, laws, and treaties that release creativity and initiative at every level of society in multifold responses originating concurrently and spontaneously.

This new consciousness requires expanding the possibilities inherent in all humanity. The innovators who will devise a new way to harness the sun’s energy for pennies or invent an engine that’s carbon negative may live in Lagos or Mumbai or Montevideo. We must ensure that entrepreneurs and inventors everywhere on the globe have the chance to change the world.

When we unite for a moral purpose that is manifestly good and true, the spiritual energy unleashed can transform us. The generation that defeated fascism throughout the world in the 1940s found, in rising to meet their awesome challenge, that they had gained the moral authority and long-term vision to launch the Marshall Plan, the United Nations, and a new level of global cooperation and foresight that unified Europe and facilitated the emergence of democracy and prosperity in Germany, Japan, Italy and much of the world. One of their visionary leaders said, "It is time we steered by the stars and not by the lights of every passing ship."

In the last year of that war, you gave the Peace Prize to a man from my hometown of 2000 people, Carthage, Tennessee. Cordell Hull was described by Franklin Roosevelt as the "Father of the United Nations." He was an inspiration and hero to my own father, who followed Hull in the Congress and the U.S. Senate and in his commitment to world peace and global cooperation.

My parents spoke often of Hull, always in tones of reverence and admiration. Eight weeks ago, when you announced this prize, the deepest emotion I felt was when I saw the headline in my hometown paper that simply noted I had won the same prize that Cordell Hull had won. In that moment, I knew what my father and mother would have felt were they alive.

Just as Hull’s generation found moral authority in rising to solve the world crisis caused by fascism, so too can we find our greatest opportunity in rising to solve the climate crisis. In the Kanji characters used in both Chinese and Japanese, "crisis" is written with two symbols, the first meaning "danger," the second "opportunity." By facing and removing the danger of the climate crisis, we have the opportunity to gain the moral authority and vision to vastly increase our own capacity to solve other crises that have been too long ignored.

We must understand the connections between the climate crisis and the afflictions of poverty, hunger, HIV-Aids and other pandemics. As these problems are linked, so too must be their solutions. We must begin by making the common rescue of the global environment the central organizing principle of the world community.

Fifteen years ago, I made that case at the "Earth Summit" in Rio de Janeiro. Ten years ago, I presented it in Kyoto. This week, I will urge the delegates in Bali to adopt a bold mandate for a treaty that establishes a universal global cap on emissions and uses the market in emissions trading to efficiently allocate resources to the most effective opportunities for speedy reductions.

This treaty should be ratified and brought into effect everywhere in the world by the beginning of 2010 – two years sooner than presently contemplated. The pace of our response must be accelerated to match the accelerating pace of the crisis itself.

Heads of state should meet early next year to review what was accomplished in Bali and take personal responsibility for addressing this crisis. It is not unreasonable to ask, given the gravity of our circumstances, that these heads of state meet every three months until the treaty is completed.

We also need a moratorium on the construction of any new generating facility that burns coal without the capacity to safely trap and store carbon dioxide.

And most important of all, we need to put a price on carbon -- with a CO2 tax that is then rebated back to the people, progressively, according to the laws of each nation, in ways that shift the burden of taxation from employment to pollution. This is by far the most effective and simplest way to accelerate solutions to this crisis.

The world needs an alliance – especially of those nations that weigh heaviest in the scales where earth is in the balance. I salute Europe and Japan for the steps they’ve taken in recent years to meet the challenge, and the new government in Australia, which has made solving the climate crisis its first priority.

But the outcome will be decisively influenced by two nations that are now failing to do enough: the United States and China. While India is also growing fast in importance, it should be absolutely clear that it is the two largest CO2 emitters — most of all, my own country –– that will need to make the boldest moves, or stand accountable before history for their failure to act.

Both countries should stop using the other’s behavior as an excuse for stalemate and instead develop an agenda for mutual survival in a shared global environment.

These are the last few years of decision, but they can be the first years of a bright and hopeful future if we do what we must. No one should believe a solution will be found without effort, without cost, without change. Let us acknowledge that if we wish to redeem squandered time and speak again with moral authority, then these are the hard truths:

The way ahead is difficult. The outer boundary of what we currently believe is feasible is still far short of what we actually must do. Moreover, between here and there, across the unknown, falls the shadow.

That is just another way of saying that we have to expand the boundaries of what is possible. In the words of the Spanish poet, Antonio Machado, "Pathwalker, there is no path. You must make the path as you walk."

We are standing at the most fateful fork in that path. So I want to end as I began, with a vision of two futures – each a palpable possibility – and with a prayer that we will see with vivid clarity the necessity of choosing between those two futures, and the urgency of making the right choice now.

The great Norwegian playwright, Henrik Ibsen, wrote, "One of these days, the younger generation will come knocking at my door."

The future is knocking at our door right now. Make no mistake, the next generation will ask us one of two questions. Either they will ask: "What were you thinking; why didn’t you act?"

Or they will ask instead: "How did you find the moral courage to rise and successfully resolve a crisis that so many said was impossible to solve?"

We have everything we need to get started, save perhaps political will, but political will is a renewable resource.

So let us renew it, and say together: "We have a purpose. We are many. For this purpose we will rise, and we will act."

Six days from now, former Vice President Al Gore will be speaking to the international community gathering at Bali, Indonesia to negotiate a global warming treaty. He will carry with him the signatures of everyone who signs a petition indicating their support of his message that we need a visionary global warming treaty to be completed, ratified, and brought into effect everywhere in the world by 2010.

Sign the petition at www.climateprotect.org/standwithal and tell your family and friends to sign.

We need the rest of the world to hear from America that we are serious about confronting the climate crisis now. Our voices will make a difference--if they are heard.

I just received this note from Barbara Bramble, National Wildlife Federation’s Senior Program Advisor for International Affairs. Barbara has landed in Bali, Indonesia, where the International Climate negotiations are now underway.

(Dec 7) - Bali is rumored to be a beautiful place, and I am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. But except for what I can see from the shuttle bus from my hotel to the conference center where the climate change negotiations are taking place, I haven’t seen much. It might as well be Downtown Anywhere USA, for all I know. But the Balinese people are amazingly welcoming and kind. I had heard of this, but it’s still just astounding to be greeted by everyone with such joy and friendliness. Even the guys in immigration and customs were quick and helpful--it makes me even more ashamed to think of the contrast with how US immigration treats all foreign visitors.

The first thing to know about the climate change negotiations now going in Bali is that though it is called a COP ("conference of the parties" meaning the countries that have signed the global warming treaty) it is really a conference of all sorts of people--thousands of NGOs from all over the world, journalists, experts, and students from a variety of universities--who care desperately about global warming. All are meeting, talking, lobbying, presenting proposals, putting out papers, holding press conferences, launching new initiatives...it’s very purposeful chaos. It’s a breed of human interaction that is fascinating and exciting and ultimately seductive--everyone becomes a participant in the kaleidoscope. But to a first timer, I can imagine it must be overwhelmingly confusing.

The second thing to know is that from the moment the COP starts, most everyone is haunted by the knowledge that they need to be in at least three places at once: a) in and around the negotiations, following the debates, meeting and lobbying delegates from as many countries as possible; b) in dozens of detailed strategy and planning meetings with other groups of NGOs, to try to agree on positions to push for; and c) then there are all these great side events, put together by some of the best minds working on global warming solutions from around the world, dozens of presentations every day, and often two or three of the ones you want to attend are scheduled at the same time. And what about lunch, and the article you promised to write for the NGO daily newsletter ECO? And, then how about getting around to that BLOG???

The tension is increased by the desperate need to convince delegates to accept certain words that seem very important to us here--but, really, who outside this hot house would even understand what the question is? A big fight was going on Thursday over whether the word "positive" should be added before the word "incentives" in the text on technology transfer. And today some are demanding to change "country submissions and a workshop" to "a programme of work" in the text on REDD – what on earth does any of that mean?

Anyway, so much for atmospherics--here is my assessment so far:

a) The U.S. delegation, which for so many years under the Bush Administration has been a blockade to meaningful progress, is in a real quandary. In previous COPs they have tried to delay and dilute agreement on the next targets for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, (which would kick in after 2012, when the current phase of reductions in the Kyoto Protocol ends). They are increasingly isolated here, as the lone holdout among industrialized countries, which hasn’t agreed to the Kyoto Protocol. When the new government that just took office in Australia announced they would join the Kyoto Protocol, that was a real blow to the White House (although now we hear there may be some backtracking in Australia after all). The US is still pushing various diversionary tactics, to try to derail these negotiations, such as their idea for a parallel track of talks among just a few of the major GHG emitting countries. But they don’t seem willing to come out front so clearly as the bad guys, as they used to.

So let’s see next week whether this adds up to their getting out of the way, to let the other countries make an agreement.

b) Most of the delegations here don’t understand how important state action is in the U.S. and they insist they only deal with the national government. So, many are anxiously waiting to hear whether the U.S. will agree to a negotiation schedule over the next 2 years, that will produce "a comparable level of effort," meaning that the U.S. would agree to match the EU’s GHG reduction commitments. I and the other US nongovernmental organizations here have explained to several of them how the states often lead in our country, with real power to take action, and that this pushes the federal government to fall into step (see for example, that now major business leaders are chiming in to ask for a national cap and trade system, because they don’t want to have to cope with different rules in the cap and trade states versus the others without such limits). Our fact sheet has been very helpful, and some delegations may be beginning to get it, but most still want to hear from the White House.

c) But failing that, it is so important for the Congress to be present here, to show there is a new day coming. That’s why it’s deeply disappointing that hardly anyone is coming. If he makes it, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) will be the focal point of a massive hunger for reassurance of U.S intentions, and he’ll carry a hugely important message.

But in the end, if the other countries want to use it as their excuse, the refusal of the official U.S. delegation here to budge could be successful in leaving the talks stuck in the mud. Stay tuned!

I woke up this morning hopeful we were one step closer to a new energy future. But then I turned on CSPAN and was dismayed to see the Senate unable to move forward and pass the good energy package the House passed just yesterday.

I thought Christmas came early when the House passed the energy bill. But the Grinch has arrived.

The vote was 53-42 in favor of ending debate and moving to a vote on final passage. Rules dictate that you need 60 votes to end debate. So we’re back to haggling.

Forty-two senators blocked a landmark energy bill deal that has united the auto industry, environmentalists and labor.

Senators who are blocking this energy deal are playing into the hands of OPEC and the oil industry at the expense of American families.

Voters need to let these senators know that stalling tactics are unacceptable, and we need action today to combat global warming and reduce our oil dependency.

This isn't over. The American people want a new, clean energy future, and we intend to get one.

I think Christmas just came early in Washington. Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the energy bill, 235-181. It was a monumental task, but we have a monumental problem on our hands in shifting this nation to a new, clean energy future. Along with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s just-passed Climate Security Act, this marks a new era in Congress and a new approach to global warming.

The House Energy Bill continues a shift in the right direction on global warming. Leaders in Congress are responding to the urgent threat that global warming poses to America’s security, wildlife and economy.

The Energy Bill passed by the U.S. House is a strong down payment on comprehensive global warming legislation, because it includes a national renewable energy standard, better fuel economy for our vehicles, and improves biofuels policy to curb global warming pollution.

The Energy Bill includes the first Congressional overhaul of fuel economy standards since 1975, the time of the first consumer computers. The Bill raises fuel economy standards 40 percent, will save consumers $40 billion a year at the pump, and does so while speeding industry transition and building American jobs. It sets a precedent that sound environmental protection and sound economic policy go hand in hand.

A 15 percent renewable energy standard will, by 2020, eliminate the equivalent global warming pollution of more than 30 medium-sized (500 Megawatt) coal-fired power plants. That adds up to $16.4 billion that consumers will save on energy bills.

As the Energy Bill comes to the Senate floor over the coming days, lawmakers should follow this example and hold the line on a 15 percent renewable energy standard and fuel economy standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020.

The Energy Bill also improves provisions that boost homegrown biofuels and reduce our dependency on oil. The improvements include performance-based standards to ensure biofuels significantly curb global warming pollution and help to ease some of the impacts of biofuels production on wildlife and native habitats. National Wildlife Federation has advocated for these additional measures as important protections for the future of wildlife.

To limit global warming, we must start now and put ourselves on track to reduce pollution by two percent each and every year, ultimately cutting pollution by 80 percent by mid-century. We can do that, and last night’s Senate Committee victory to approve the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is another sign of Congressional leadership on global warming.

The Alliance for Climate Protection and Current TV are proud to announce that the grand prize winner of their "60 Seconds to Save the Earth" Ecospot Contest is Dave Schlafman for his video entitled Sky is Falling.

Watch it now at:   http://current.com/items/87610321_ecospot_grand_prize_winner_sky_is_falling

Those elephants are great messengers.

Forward this link to friends, family, co-workers, and neighbors so they, too, can step into Dave's streetscape.

You can watch all of the winners and runners-up at: http://www.current.com/ecospot

The winners will be featured on Current TV and MySpace.  Be sure to tell your friends about these exciting videos!

This evening’s vote marks a new era in Congress and a new approach to global warming. After years of empty promises in Congress, this evening’s victory is a triumph of leadership and political will.

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, led by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Cali., voted 11-8 to send to the full Senate meaningful global warming legislation that would quickly put the nation on the right path to reducing the pollution causing global warming.

Today is a turning point on action to confront global warming and reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.

Together with tomorrow’s expected passage in the House of a bill to update fuel economy standards and set a national renewable energy standard, Congress is showing the rest of the world we will be leaders, not laggards, in crafting solutions to global warming.

Mainstream America is rising up to be heard on the urgent need to confront global warming, calling on political leaders to find a new approach that works for our economy and our environment. The Climate Security Act does both.

The momentum for action is building in Congress, but sadly, not in the White House. The Bush administration once again has shown up empty handed as world leaders gather this week in Bali, Indonesia to grapple with this global emergency. And the president has issued a veto threat on the newly passed House energy plan.

I urge members of Congress to listen to the voices of millions of Americans who want real progress to fight global warming, and not to the voices of a few who urge further delay and procrastination.

We are running out of time to act. The latest data from the Arctic show that the planet's massive polar ice cap may melt decades faster than scientists had been anticipated. The world's leading scientific body on climate change warned this month that between 40 and 70 percent of species could disappear from the face of the Earth.

Ten years have already gone by since 160 nations agreed to the landmark Kyoto protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Sadly, during these critical years, the United States sat on the sidelines while other nations worked on solutions. At a time when we should have been cutting pollution, U.S. emissions instead increased by six percent.

As I write, the nations of the world are gathering in Bali to reinvigorate global cooperation on climate change. But the Bush administration is giving other nations a cold shoulder once again.

So what can we do?

We can learn a lesson from California's approach to global warming. California recognized its impact on global emissions as the sixth largest economy in the world and forged ahead with solutions.

If California can do it, surely the U.S. Congress can, too. Neither the House nor the Senate has ever passed a comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse gas pollution. That is shameful.

Fortunately, two leaders in Congress from California are helping fill the leadership void, and are successfully making action happen on the most pressing issue facing the nation.

Before House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took over this year, the House had passed a steady diet of subsidies and favorable treatment for oil companies and other polluters. Now, under her leadership, the House has passed a far-ranging package of clean energy measures. And, working with Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., she has successfully added a measure to improve fuel economy for cars and SUV’s, providing yet another important down payment on global warming action. We expect a vote on the House energy bill today.

As Speaker Pelosi works to deliver energy legislation to jumpstart our clean energy future, California Senator Barbara Boxer is setting the stage to keep the momentum going in Congress. As chair of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over global warming legislation, she is working to improve and advance a bill that will go even further to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from major polluters.

The Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is a bipartisan bill that would put U.S. pollution on a downward pathway and create new economic opportunity for clean energy technologies. The bill requires companies to turn their emissions around and steadily cut their emissions of global warming pollution by about two percent every year. The bill quickly puts us on the pathway scientists say is needed to deal seriously with global warming. Senator Boxer's efforts are the best hope for forcing the Senate to vote on a serious global warming bill before the elections.

Despite the progress Speaker Pelosi and Senator Boxer are making in Washington, they have had to make concessions along the way. Some who share my sense of urgency about global warming may be inclined to criticize leaders for not pushing for perfection. I share the frustration that too many members of Congress are still dragging their feet. Voters will have the opportunity, and I would argue the responsibility, to hold those members accountable at the ballot box in November.

In the meantime, urgency requires action. Every minute we delay U.S. action, we pump another 25 million pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

It's time for Congress to stop stalling, and indeed, Boxer is moving climate legislation forward in the Senate. Just moments ago, as the mark up of this important bill began in the Environment and Public Works Committee, Sen. George Voinavich, R-Ohio, acknowledged, "we are bringing this issue to a head." It seems that all sides of the debate recognize that this is a turning point.

The old approach of waiting for the president to join international efforts has led to years of delay. And yet, jumping to an all-or-nothing approach in Congress could also lead to stalemate.

Pelosi and Boxer should continue to push for progress that puts us on track with what the scientists say is needed, even if it comes in stages. They deserve credit for leading the way on what is arguably the biggest challenge of our time.