That’s the message President Obama floated this week.

When it comes to a choice between jobs and cap-and-trade, jobs are clearly the president’s top priority this year, even though just last week Obama voiced support for cap-and-trade during his State of the Union address.

Obama told a town hall meeting in Nashua, NH, it was time to put plans to create green jobs — by promoting renewable energy projects — on a separate track from capping U.S. GHG emissions. “We may be able to separate these things out. And, it’s conceivable that’s where the Senate ends up,” he told the New Hampshire crowd.

Oddly enough, it was Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC) who was the fastest and loudest to denounce Obama’s apparent willingness to give up on a cap-and-trade bill, according to a report in The New York Times. The White House quickly insisted that cap-and-trade is still a Presidential priority.

However, Graham dismissed Obama’s plan to separate cap-and-trade from an energy policy as “half-assed.” The South Carolina Senator fears an energy-only bill won’t promote nuclear power and expanding off-shore drilling for oil.

Graham doesn’t think environmentalists will support his nuclear power and drilling goals without a cap-and-trade program. That’s why he’s seeking a compromise position.

Is your facility equipped to handle an oil spill? Would EPA agree? If you’re one of the 517,000 facilities mandated to have an SPCC plan by July 2009, then you’d better be. Because EPA’s not just cracking down on spills and hazards. They’re checking SPCC plans as well. That could mean getting slammed with fines as large as $32,500 per violation per day for paperwork. So how do you develop a plan to prevent spills, respond quickly and comply with EPA’s requirements?

Purchase the report here.