washington there's been debate about a 3-p bill, you know, talking about three different pollutants, sox, nox, and mercury. there's also been talk about a 4-p bill to pick up carbon as well. i remember when president bush was, former president bush was running for office, he campaigned on a platform of supporting a 4-p bill and then changed his mind after he was elected and backed away from that. but i think there can be restrictions on each of these pollutants, including carbon, and i think we can do it probably in the next congress as well as in this congress. but it's got to be done in the right way. the process becomes very important, the process that you follow. and of course the -- it's a difficult lift to accomplish, but i don't think it's impossible. >> what do you see as the main trade-off in scaling back the ambition of a climate and energy bill and specifically focusing just on utilities? i mean, some of the opponents of that approach say that it will mean that you will be generating less revenue for other important causes, there are a lot of industries that actually want to get in