'Compromise' not a dirty word

Sen. Lindsey Graham apparently dodged a pie in the face on Monday when Berkeley County Republicans declined, for now, to censure him for the sin of recurrent bipartisanship. The county party's executive committee has decided to wait until January, and the Dorchester GOP reportedly is doing the same.

Not so, their counterparts in Charleston who voted last week to formally state their objections to Sen. Graham's efforts to work with Senate Democrats on a number of issues. That view fails to acknowledge that responsible governance occasionally requires compromise. Maintaining a strictly partisan level of discourse might work on the stump but neither party should be formally opposed to bipartisan cooperation to resolve national problems.

Apparently, the last straw for the Charleston executive committee was Sen. Graham's decision to work with the likes of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., on an energy bill aimed at easing global warming.

The GOP committee contended that "global warming caused by carbon emissions is still in doubt as evidenced by the past decade of cooling temperatures." It also cited the potential expense of the energy bill's cap-and-trade plan.

Global warming might still be a theory, but there's a lot of melting polar ice and tundra to support it. Man-made activity might not be solely to blame, but there is substantial evidence to support the idea that it is at least a contributing factor.

A federal study this year flatly concluded: "Global sea level is rising and there is evidence that the rate is accelerating." It cited the likelihood that greenhouse gases, "primarily from human contributions," are to blame.

Rising sea level will threaten coastal communities in a variety of ways, so the issue ought to have particular resonance in Charleston. The property of many Republicans, as well as Democrats and Independents, could be at risk.

A recent analysis on the effects of sea level rise, detailed in our Saturday edition, cited some of the problems facing coastal communities.

During the next 100 years, melting polar ice is expected to increase sea level by as much as 23 inches. That will require the costly construction of dikes, seawalls and bulkheads -- the expense of which will have to be borne by taxpayers and property owners.

The energy bill seeks to reduce greenhouse gases by a cap-and-trade system, similar to a program that sharply reduced acid rain without throttling the economy. It also would encourage alternative energy production, which would have the beneficial effect of reducing America's dependence of foreign oil.

Unfortunately, the bill passed by the House has a number of flaws that need to be addressed by the Senate.

Maybe Sen. Graham, a bona fide conservative, can improve the bill during Senate deliberations. He deserves credit for working across the aisle in an effort to produce solutions, instead of more hot air.