If you've been following the news this morning, the you know that the Senate version of the climate cap and trade bill is about to drop this morning, courtesy of Senators Boxer and Kerry. The bill, which had been delayed for weeks, isn't public yet but already leaked versions are making their way around the web. Details are still scarce, but here's what I've gleaned from press reports:

* Like the House bill, the use will use 2005 as a baseline for greenhouse gas emissions. Unlike the House version (which calls for a 17% reduction), the Senate bill calls for a 20% reduction. Supposedly, the bar has been raised to take into account the reduced carbon emissions caused by the recession, which I blogged about last week. Let's get real, though, the 20% target is an easy giveaway during negotiations and will almost certainly drop.

* The EPA is not pre-empted in the Senate bill. Essentially, this means that EPA would have full authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions even if the bill passes. This is an interesting addition to the bill. It makes good sense to give the EPA legal authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon (and indeed, that's what the Supreme Court's 2007 ruling was all about), but the House bill pre-empted EPA from regulating. My guess is that the Senate is worried about political compromises watering down the effect of the bill, and leaving a backdoor for the EPA to enforce a carbon cap would ensure effectiveness. Look for Senate Democrats to try to keep this provision.

* More involvement from Department of Justice, to keep the carbon markets honest and ensure carbon offsets are not procured by fraud. These provisions make sense, and it's politically untenable to attack law enforcement so look for these provisions to stay.

* Specific targeting of the airline industry for carbon reductions. As I previously blogged, the airline industry has thus far been exempt from the EU's carbon trading scheme, but will likely be the first to have to comply with broad EU rules. The US rules will simply add more pressure to US airlines to modernize their fleets. Look for the devil in details -- the US carriers, several of whom are near bankruptcy, aren't going to take well to having to comply with two different regulations so harmonization with the EU will be important here.

You can expect more coverage from this blog as the bill progresses through the Senate. For the time being, it's fair to say the bill is a good start. The prospects of action on a climate bill in 2009 are near zero at the moment, though, and with midterm elections next year it would take a major win on health care for the climate bill to have a decent chance of passage in early 2010. Unlike the health care debate, though, the interest groups in this fight are more diverse and less organized. Already, the US Chamber of Commerce, the largest pro-business lobbying organization, is losing some key members for its position opposing climate change legislation. So if the bill progresses, expect it to proceed at a much less heated tone than the health care debate. And that is something we can all agree is a good thing.