I think this is probably a good thing. As I've stated in this blog, we are jumping into some really onerous regulation on what, on balance is limited (and sloppy) research into (alleged) AGW.
50 years of data is hardly enough to claim we're all going to die. Especially as sloppy as research into (alleged) AGW has been. We can debate the merits, but to say the science of something as complicated as climate is complete and irrefutable is just intellectually dishonest. Economic destruction is much more detrimental to humans than (alleged) AGW can ever be. The economic engine is what provides solutions. If, in fact (alleged) AGW turns out to be real, the market is more likely to turn it around than onerous (and corrupted) government regulation.
The "Precautionary Principle" in this country has run amok.