Democrats show a "brown state-green state" divide over environmental, industrial policy

President Obama is discovering that a Democratic majority in Congress does not always mean smooth sailing for his policy agenda. Energy issues divide the party, and the split often comes down to geography: those who represent areas driven by coal and manufacturing, and those who don't.

"This brown state-green state clash is likely to encumber any effort to set a mandatory ceiling on the carbon dioxide emissions blamed as the biggest contributor to global warming, something Mr. Obama has declared to be one of his highest priorities," John Broder reports for The New York Times. He points out that "brown states" are typically battleground states, and their congressional races are often won by smaller margins. Support for green policies can often mean the difference between a win or loss.

“My message over all is that for us to support what needs to be done in addressing global warming we need to demonstrate that, in fact, jobs are created,” says Sen. Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan Democrat. “It’s not a theoretical argument. We have to come up with a policy that makes sense, that is manageable on the cost end, that creates new technology — and that treats states equitably and addresses regional differences.”

Rep. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, said these concerns are heard by green-staters, noting that the president spoke last week at an Ohio factory that produces wind turbine parts. "Every single wind turbine takes 26 tons of steel to construct,” said Markey. “A lot of new jobs will be created if we craft a piece of global warming legislation correctly, and that is our intention.” (Read more)

Here's the Times' map showing which states are most dependent on coal for energy, based on information from the Energy Information Administration.