Internal Rifts Cloud Democrats' Opportunity on Warming

Waxman's bill, for example, is extremely strong, mandating an 80 percent cut in emissions by 2050. Waxman is known as a dogged street fighter as well as a dealmaker; after feuding with Dingell for years over acid rain, they forged the compromise that led to the 1990 amendments. But while he believes that global warming may be irreversible if emissions do not start to decline within a decade, he does not see how Democrats can get strict emission limits past Bush. So he seems content to hold hearings that will expose GOP intransigence.

"Quite frankly, this is not a bill that's going to pass in six months, or even two years," he said.

While Waxman is willing to wait for radical change, other Democrats are pushing for lesser reductions with greater speed. For example, five-term Rep. Tom Udall (N.M.) has been lobbying for a "third way" between nothing and a hard-and-fast emissions limit, offering corporations a "safety valve" of modest fees if they cannot meet pollution targets.

Udall comes from a green pedigree -- his father served as interior secretary, and his uncle was a longtime conservationist congressman -- but some environmentalists dismiss his plan as a recipe for inaction. When Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) proposed a similar plan in 2004, the Environmental Defense Fund ran ads criticizing him in his home state.

Still, Udall has enlisted a Republican co-sponsor, Wisconsin Rep. Tom Petri, in hopes of engineering a quick compromise. He says the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.

"I wrote this bill with the idea that Bush can sign it," he said. "Our idea is to start now."

But as long as Dingell wields his gavel, starting anything might be tough. Last October, Udall approached Dingell in the Democratic cloakroom and handed over some information about his bill. Dingell never got back to him. In an interview in his office, which is dominated by heads of animals he has shot and photos of presidents he has worked with, Dingell recalled his friendships with Udall's father and uncle, but brushed off questions about Udall's bill.

"If I thought it was a good idea, I would have already done it," he said.

Gearing Up for Showdown

A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll found that only 27 percent of Americans approve of Bush's handling of global warming, so it's easy to see why Pelosi welcomes a confrontation. That is one reason she asked Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), a Bush-bashing environmentalist and a Pelosi loyalist, to lead her new committee. In April 2005, when Bush walked hand in hand with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah after asking him to produce more oil, Pelosi asked Markey to deliver the party's response to Bush's radio address.

"She does believe, along with Iraq, that this is a big issue on which we have to take on the president," Markey said.

Industry lobbyists say they expect to endure a lot of unpleasant climate hearings during this Congress, but they are not too worried about draconian legislation. They do not think the House or the Senate can pass anything too stringent, much less override a Bush veto. And they say their focus groups show that the public's eagerness to do something about global warming droops after hearing warnings of serious economic consequences.

With trillions of dollars at stake, it is reasonable to expect industry-funded ads to raise those alarms, in the vein of the "Harry and Louise" spots that helped sink President Bill Clinton's health-care plans.