• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • The EPA, the Budget and Global Warming

    President Obama released his budget blueprint yesterday. Titled, “The New Era of Responsibility,” the full 140-page blueprint, broken down by department, can be found here. The Environmental Protection Agency’s budget, which balloons from $7.8 billion in 2009 to $10.5 billion in 2010, includes the following paragraph:

    After enactment of the Budget, the Administration will work expeditiously with key stakeholders and Congress to develop an economy-wide emissions reduction program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions approximately 14 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and approximately 83 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. This program will be implemented through a cap-and-trade system, a policy approach that dramatically reduced acid rain at much lower costs than the traditional Government regulations and mandates of the past.

    Through a 100 percent auction to ensure that the biggest polluters do not enjoy windfall profits, this program will fund vital investments in a clean energy future totaling $150 billion over 10 years, starting in fiscal year 2012.”

    Heritage energy analyst Ben Lieberman points out, the fact the blueprint says “approximately 83 percent below” makes one think the administration has taken some time to think about this. Although a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon dioxide cannot be implemented unless a Congress passes a bill or the EPA tries to regulate carbon through the backdoor under the Clean Air Act, it is clear that the wheels for this idea are well in motion. The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Iain Murray emphasizes that this is quite contradictory to Obama’s promise of no tax hikes:

    ‘Not one dime,’ said President Obama in his address to Congress, referring to how much extra tax people earning under $250,000 a year will have to pay in his budget. Unfortunately, even if you don’t have to pay extra tax, you will have to pay extra fees for your energy, which are passed on to the government via energy companies. That’s the effect of the President’s cap-and-trade scheme for carbon emissions, an important part of his new budget. Energy companies will have to pay the government for permits for each ton of carbon dioxide or equivalent they emit in the generation of power. They will pass on these costs to the consumer, as has happened everywhere a cap-and-trade scheme has been tried.”

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to The EPA, the Budget and Global Warming

    1. Thomas Gray, South C says:

      The policy thats being proposed will ruin our econimy, the policy to reduce acid rain worked without damaging our econimy becouse the only thing that needed to be done was put scrubbers on the emissions [ smoke stacks ] of the coal fired electric power plants.

      The reason why this policy is going to ruin our econimy is becouse the only way for manufacturing and industry to reduce emissions is to tell their employee's to go home and not work.

      It cannot work, but they can take money and say they are doing something.

    2. Mary Osborne says:

      And just how much was spent on the Iraq wars? Come on people, a 27% increase to an agency that has been stripped to no increases for most years is called catch up, not ballooning. The energy savings will be mostly from utilities, which means, yes, consumer's bills will go up. Isn't it about time we start paying for fixing our problems instead of building a war machine that gets us nowhere?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.