Here is what I care about the most when it comes to any rating system I would support and model my business after:

1 Will it actually help the environment?
2 Transparency (close to number 1 because all systems can be corrupted)
3 Cost (complete cost including design)

Here are the two links that are important to not allow banning of any rating system. Competition and hard work is good:
https://www.change.org/petitions/senator-al-franken-vote-down-ansi-amend...
http://forcechange.com/64616/dont-restrict-standards-for-energy-saving-t...

With both of these rating systems competing, I know a common ground is going to be reached because we all do realize change needs to happen. I really believe anyone with a technical/science background understands that we are hurting our environment.

On the flip side, you can't force chemical companies to change literally 5-15 $300-$600 million dollar plants overnight (although they should) to produce a new type of chemicals/electronics/other components that compete with companies that do not care without a backlash (sad fact). The truth is that they are major "investors" on Capitol Hill (money that could best be spent in retrofitting old processes to new cleaner ones). LEED can learn from this and will work with companies in a clear path to success.

Internationally LEED is a big deal and is making positive changes across the construction industry in many developing countries that have little to limited building codes. I support an open clear system that we can all contribute on.