The move comes after a work session on the bill Kerry introduced with fellow Democrat Barbara Boxer was boycotted in the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee. The bill also now faces a minimum five-week delay before a potential vote of the full Senate – scuttling the prospect of meaningful US legislation before Copenhagen.

Kerry positions the trio as “a good team here to help create a dual track” toward climate legislation that could receive at least the necessary 60 votes in the Senate to overcome procedural roadblocks opponents would likely put in its path. He hastens to add that the effort is “done with the full consent and support of Senator Boxer and of other senators involved in this process, including the majority leader, Harry Reid”.

Kerry of Massachusetts and Graham of South Carolina co-authored an editorial in The New York Times last month pledging an aggressive, bipartisan approach to climate change. It was viewed as a significant turning point in the debate as Graham stepped forward as one of few Republicans supporting climate change legislation. They outlined climate change legislation with heavy emphasis on energy independence, including support for domestic fossil fuels exploration and nuclear power.

Graham emphasized the need for those elements again Wednesday.

“At the end of the day, for us to be successful, the energy independence piece -- offshore drilling for oil and gas -- has to be done in a meaningful way to add to our inventory and create jobs. The nuclear piece has to create a renaissance of nuclear power that will help us solve the climate problem, as well as create millions of new jobs. The clean coal piece has to be meaningful because we have 250 years of coal supply,” Graham says.

Their aim now is “to reach out, to broaden the base of support” beyond the six Senate committees with jurisdiction over climate change legislation – although it’s unclear how much support exists even within the committees.

Kerry says the trio met earlier Wednesday with Energy Secretary Steven Chu and plans to meet with other Obama Administration officials including Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Carol Browner, the White House energy and climate policy coordinator.

“We will be working closely with the White House over the course of the next weeks with a view to trying to pull together what ultimately could be presented to Senator Reid and the leadership – a piece of legislation that we hope could get 60 votes necessary to pass,” Kerry says.

The trio appear to be staking out a very pro-business stance on climate policy, referencing a letter Tuesday from the US Chamber of Commerce and the formation of a new group, American Businesses for Clean Energy, billed as a “platform for leading US businesses to express their support for meaningful and effective legislation that will drive clean technology innovation, create jobs, and address the threat of global climate change”.

The Chamber, a leading business lobbying group, watched a handful of high-profile companies leave earlier this autumn over its stance on climate change. In its letter to the leaders of the EPW Committee, the Chamber says it now “stands ready to work with Congress to resolve this issue in a bipartisan manner that recognizes regional differences, the state of the technology, and the compelling need for a solution that minimizes overall economic impact”. Its support only goes so far, however. The Chamber pledged to oppose legislation it views as threatening American jobs or creating trade inequalities, among other conditions.

A day after Republicans lost a long-held Congressional seat in upstate New York thanks to a division between moderates and conservatives in their own party, Graham called on his colleagues to take a hard look at their position on climate change.

“Every member of Congress, Republicans included, has to answer to themselves and their constituents: Is carbon pollution a problem? If it is, what are you going to do about it,” he says. “... I am convinced, with my colleagues, that controlling carbon pollution is good business. If you do it right, people can make money and you’ll have a cleaner planet and the whole world will follow.”

He says he hopes Republicans will at least give climate change legislation a listen, “and if at the end of the day, you can’t support it, that’s OK”. But, he added, there are consequences to doing nothing.

“My hope is that participation is seen as a positive and not a negative,” Graham says. “And if you can’t participate in solving a hard problem, why are you up here?”