Over at The Atlantic blog, Derek Thompson has posted an interesting few points regarding the similarities between the so-called cap and trade energy bill, American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), and the currently under debate healthcare bill, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200). Since it looks like the healthcare bill is going to pass both the House and the Senate, it’s only natural for political rubberneckers to cast their eyes to the next Washington smash-up.

Thompson, who refers to another post about why liberals should be optimistic for the passage of H.R. 2454, says that they should check themselves, first. He makes two points: That public support for the climate change bill is not as acute as it seems; and that international pressure for climate change legislation is not as potent as pundits think.

The first point is well taken that the public support for climate change isn’t as pronounced as it seems. It is in many ways similar to the discourse surrounding the healthcare debate: In the abstract, people are for it even if they don’t fully understand what being for it entails. It’s true that opponents of the healthcare bill can sow disinformation and confusion when the public doesn’t fully understand what it’s supposed to have an opinion about. However, that’s why we have a representative democracy. Hopefully, the electorate was able to make its informed decisions about its representatives, whom they trust to make informed decisions about impossibly complex issues, such as healthcare reform and climate change. After all, consumers make a reasonably informed decision about who they want to fix their automobile, and then they let the auto mechanic perform his duties. If they don’t like the outcome of the transaction, then they can choose another auto mechanic.

The second of Thompson’s points, that international pressure is not that important to the American legislative process, could be said to have been weakened by the recent surprise bestowal of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama. Thompson says,

I don’t doubt that an American climate change bill could change the international landscape of climate change reform and encourage other countries to pursue their own environmental policies. But I don’t think senators from Nebraska and Louisiana are thinking about Japan and China as much as their thinking about energy prices and business output.

but I think he discounts the historical significance of the Obama administration. Everything the President has accomplished so far has had to it a predetermined, Hollywood-style trappings of a Real Historical Event. The Obama administration has accomplished a feat of historic proportions merely by coming into office, and as the days pass it seems that its legacy continues to grow. Despite partisan differences, it seems like the legislators of today will not want their legacy to include opposing an Internationally-supported, history-making piece of legislation.