Congressional debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is moving forward, and as we can see taking action will have a price:

A study by the Energy Information Administration found that the bill would set in motion an important environment benefit, cutting greenhouse gases by 45 to 55 percent by 2030. But it would come at a price: reducing economic growth by an estimated 0.2 to 0.6 percent of U.S. gross domestic product.



That's not nothing, but it's worth noting that it's also not all that much. Even if you assume the highest end of that projection, the United States in 2030 will still be a substantially richer country than the United States in 2008. And I think there's good reason to believe that a basic model like that is going to somewhat overstate the cost of adjustment since there will probably be public health benefits to a shift to a lower emissions economy.

Meanwhile, check out Kate Sheppard for the details on the bill -- it's not a great bill, but I'd be thrilled to see it passed and then Bush follows through on his veto threat and then we've established a new baseline for action come 2009.

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