Kate Sheppard has a run-down on the Lieberman-Warner climate bill, which is scheduled for voting in the senate this week. Bradford Plumer calls out McCain for shying away from the bill. Meanwhile, George Will explains why I'm increasingly leery of this response to the problem:

If carbon emissions are the planetary menace that the political class suddenly says they are, why not a straightforward tax on fossil fuels based on each fuel's carbon content? This would have none of the enormous administrative costs of the baroque cap-and-trade regime. And a carbon tax would avoid the uncertainties inseparable from cap-and-trade's government allocation of emission permits sector by sector, industry by industry. So a carbon tax would be a clear and candid incentive to adopt energy-saving and carbon-minimizing technologies.

Ron Bailey has a good overview of the policy choices here. And Jim Manzi does his best to talk us out of carbon taxes as well here and here.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.