• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Global Warming Bill Isn’t About Saving the Environment or Protecting the Consumer

    Policymakers made it quite clear consumers will be hurt by a cap and trade bill. They also made it clear that this isn’t an environmental issue. It’s strictly politics. Representatives Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Ed Markey (D-MA) modified their global warming cap and trade proposal to win support from skeptical congressmen, but when any policymakers introduced modifications to protect the consumer and American businesses, Members promptly voted the amendments down.

    The first was an amendment that would void the legislation within a year without a deal with India and China. A second would have voided the bill if gas prices surpassed to $5-a-gallon. The third would void legislation if unemployment reached 15 percent. And a fourth provision would have repealed “the entire law if the average retail price of electricity sold to residential sector goes up by more than 10 percent in one or more census divisions.” The fact that $5-a-gallon gas and 15% unemployment were set as benchmarks should be a red flag to any energy bill. What’s worse is that all four amendments failed to pass.

    Climatologist Chip Knappenberger found the climate change as a result of Waxman-Markey legislation to be almost too small to measure:

    By the year 2050, the “clean” version reduces projected global temperatures by 0.044ºC (or ~3% less than the rise without the legislation), the “dirty” version gets you about half of that, or 0.022ºC (~1.5% less), and the “dirtier” version saves half of that again, or 0.011ºC (<1% less). By century’s end, you don’t do much better–the temperature reduction amounts to, respectively, 0.112ºC (0.20ºF), 0.046ºC (0.08ºF), and 0.013ºC (0.02ºF).”

    In other words, if the bill works we will experience lower temperatures by only hundredths of a degree in 2050 and no more than two-tenths of a degree at the end of the century. Meanwhile, China, the country that recently took over as the world’s largest carbon emitter, and rapidly-developing India will continue to emit without penalty.

    Even analysis by the Environmental Protection Agency shows that a 60 percent reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions by 2050 will reduce global temperature by 0.1 to 0.2 degree Centigrade by 2095.

    But a multilateral approach simply won’t work. Just ask Europe. The Kyoto Protocol was a failure and so is EU’s carbon trading plan. As a result, permit prices are falling, electricity prices are up and carbon reduction is negligible. And this doesn’t even include two of the world’s biggest polluters, India and China.

    In a case of international cooperation, India, China and the rest of the developing world would have to revert to their 2000 levels of carbon emissions by 2050. On a per-capita basis, China would backtrack to about one-tenth of what the U.S. emitted in 2000. India and most of the developing world would have to drop to even lower levels. This scenario is a fantasy and would de-develop the developing world. China and India won’t jump on board. In April a member of the Indian delegation to the U.N.’s climate conference asserted,

    If the question is whether India will take on binding emission reduction commitments, the answer is no. It is morally wrong for us to agree to reduce when 40 percent of Indians do not have access to electricity.”

    In effect, Waxman-Markey could help develop these countries faster by sending all our manufacturing and energy-intensive jobs overseas since it will be less costly to operate in other countries. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), remarked, “It’s a competition issue. Do not eliminate our middle class and send it to China.” The solution for that? Subsidies and protectionism, of course:

    But Democrats responded that their bill already has built into it several provisions to protect energy-intensive companies, including pulp and paper, steel, aluminum, glass and cement. That includes a 15 percent distribution of free allowances to the trade-vulnerable industries, as well as a clause that allows the president by 2025 to impose tariffs on carbon-intensive goods imported into the United States.”

    So not only will our energy costs be $2,979 higher per year, but now everything we import will be more expensive too. (More on protectionism here.)

    Retorting Rep. Rogers’ statement about sending our jobs to China, Chairman Waxman said, “We shouldn’t say we’re going to shoot ourselves in the head just because India and China won’t do what we want them to do.”

    Yet that’s exactly what we’re doing.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    17 Responses to Global Warming Bill Isn’t About Saving the Environment or Protecting the Consumer

    1. Gary Steinberg,Linco says:

      Those communities being assaulted by "The Wind Energy Mafia", know cap and trade, renewable energy credits traded for wind power (a scientific sham just like lgobal warming)will only increase our electrical energy costs. No where in Europe have any wind turbine projects reduced fossil fuel utilization. Yet, the Obama administration allows Tax Equity schemes to be promulgated all over in shortend review processes in many state to develop this scam of energy production. It should be noted that wind power only exists to milk Renewable Energy Credits. They produce negligable power at very high cost. Even the grid can't utilize it at present , and for years to come.. So why is it being pushed? Without REC, that industry , and many renewable schemes, are dead. Without Cap and Trade, we would be much better off. Scams likeIndustrial Wind Energy could never exist. Did we learn anything from creative financing, Enron, or AIG? I think not. We are doomed to third world status if Cap and Tax continues.

    2. AntonioSosa, Florida says:

      No patriotic and informed American can support the global warming/cap and trade scam, more fraudulent than any Nigerian scam. Cap and trade is a huge tax on the poor and the middle class designed to give the powers of a dictator to Obama and to further enrich his billionaire friends (Gore, Soros, Goldman Sachs, Obama’s Chicago Climate Exchange friends, GE, etc.)

      Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” says famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence.

      Those brainwashed to the point of wanting to destroy the economy to "prevent global warming" remind us of primitive humans who believed that killing and sacrificing others would ensure them good weather. Human beings don't have the power to control climate!

      More and more scientists and thinking people all over the world are realizing that man-made global warming is a hoax that threatens our future and the future of our children. More than 700 international scientists dissent over man-made global warming claims. They are now more than 13 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers. http://www.climatechangefraud.com/content/view/35

      Additionally, more than 30,000 American scientists have signed onto a petition that states, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." http://www.petitionproject.org

      We pray that honest leaders – both Democrat and Republican – are able to save us from Obama's criminal global warming/cap-and-trade scam.

    3. Pingback: » Financial News Update - 05/20/09 NoisyRoom.net: “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the face of tyranny is no virtue.” Barry Goldwater

    4. Spiritof76, New Hamp says:

      Those that project the effect of surface temperature based on carbon dioxide need to explain how it is that about half of the increase of 0.7C of the last 100 years is wiped out in the last five years when the carbon dioxide emissions have not changed.

      We sue businesses and people who sell products and services under false claims. We need to do the same with global warming and carbon dioxide.

    5. David Beaird says:

      Global Warming and the CO2 scheme is nothing more than a political scam to take trillions of dollars from the American consumer under the guise of health and safety. On the surface, people see the headlines and fear that our fossil fueled life style is warming the planet through elevated CO2 levels. The UN-IPCC, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and most Democratic Congressmen are pushing hard to get an energy tax passed in the next few weeks. HR-2454, the American Energy and Security Act of 2009, will thoroughly undermine our way of life if passed. It is nothing more than an exceptionally expensive energy tax on all forms of energy. This bill will cost the American people trillions of dollars if allowed to pass. Do not be taken in by this needless energy tax bill. Email you Senators and Congressmen and tell them to vote “NO” on HR-2454 when it comes up for a vote.

    6. mike kinkade says:

      it is clear we have elected the largest collection of idiots in history

    7. okiejim Oklahoma says:

      If Congress and the current administration are really serious about reducing our dependence on foreign oil they would be pushing to develop our resources. The Waxman/Markey bill is all about greed and politics. It has nothing to do with global warming,the biggest hoax ever played on the people of the world. Anyone from California trying to tell the rest of the country how it should be conducting business should be concerned about their own back yard.

      I would still like to see my schedule for when I will be able to breath so I can plan for my reduction in CO2 emmissions.

    8. An American Patriot says:

      I am suprised that more have not figured out the real thrust behind the growth of the myth of Global Warming. It is the growth of Al Gore's bank account. At last count, he now has accumulated $100,000,000. That is what is reported. Not a bad return on a hoax. WAKE UP AMERICA. You are being taken for a really expensive ride.

      If it is so crucial that we drive in little cracker box cars, incurring more serious injuries an a setting with less healthcare available, how come Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi and all of that gang of thieves travel by private jet. What, no footprints allowed by their methods of transportation?

    9. Lloyd Scallan - New says:

      WAKE-UP people. This entire "Man Made Global Warming" issue is yet another scam brought about

      by the anarchist that are determined to destroy capitalism so that socialism will prosper. As always, this LIE is aided by the liberial news media that has the same overall purpose. If we would just take the time to look at the true facts, instead of believing the lies of the left, we would understand that IT'S ALL A LIE!

    10. Todd Christian - Kla says:

      Waxman and Markey have a more sinister agenda. Since there is no global warming and probably will be global cooling in the next 10 years, they will be able to claim that their measure has worked to save the planet. This bill is a win-win for progressive politicians – they get the money from productive businesses and consumers to redistribute, and they get the credit for something that would have happened anyway! And, with the support of the mainstream media, what are the chances that the American electorate is going to see through this scam?

    11. Ben C, Ann Arbor, MI says:

      Its not the money, its the amount. And the amount will be significant over the next ten years. We have the Church of Global Warming and Obama is the Pope. The tith to his church is not voluntary but mandated.

    12. Dave, Bellingham, Wa says:

      I commented about a remark the Rick Larsen D-WA, made in response to a question about the legislation. He was concerned only that large companies would be better able to game the system than small companies.

      April 17th, 2009 at 9:17 am

      You’ll notice that the cluless Larsen expresses not a whit of concern about a program with huge administrative costs and opportunities for political mischief that will suck hundreds of billions of dollars out of the economy and the pockets of taxpayers. The truth about cap and trade is that by presenting it falsely as a “market”, its supporters can gloss over the fact that it is in fact a hugely regressive carbon tax.

      They don’t even have the honesty to propose it in a revenue-neutral way. They could, for instance, use the revenues from it to reduce the corporate income tax. (Choose your own, as long as it is a permanent reduction in a marginal tax rate or a regressive tax, like FICA) Instead, all of the revenue will flow into a treasury that will be free to use it, for example, to bail out mismanaged “too-large-to-fail” banks, which were run into the ground by politically-connected idiots.

      In my opinion, an honestly-presented Pigovian (Google it, or see Greg Mankiw’s blog) tax might be acceptable, after a suitable period of honest debate about its consequences, both economic and environmental, if imposed in a revenue-neutral manner.

      In the meantime, the EU, having seen cap and trade fail, will move away from it in order to stem the tide of employment that is being shifted to countries without the huge economic load imposed by this fraud. Germany is going to be the home of thirty new coal-fired power plants in the next six years, by the way, so the enlightened europeans aren’t quite putting their euros where their mouths have been.

      In the end, what does cap and trade accomplish? It increases carbon emissions, because it shifts production to economies that are less efficient than ours. It reduces employment and economic growth, because of the economic load that it imposes on the private sector. It fails to affect, at all, the climate, in any positive way. It creates a whole new inefficient (remember guys, it’s the government!) bureaucracy to suck money out of the private sector. Because it reduces economic growth, it imperils, over the long term, any opportunities to deal with climate change, should it occur and should its effects be as negative as some foresee.

      It’s time for a note about Al Gore:

      Recently, he went to work for Kleiner Perkins, the huge venture capital firm on Sand Hill Road, as a “fixer”. KP, having run short of opportunities in the tech sector, has made huge bets in “alternative energy” companies. They didn’t get rich by being stupid, and they realize that the survival of the companies in which they have invested relies on continued favor and infusions of taxpayer cash from a friendly Congress. They can see which way the wind is blowing, and the odds are that they’re going to get even richer, with the help of dupes like Congressman Larsen. The rest of us, of course, will bear the cost of this colossal misallocation of capital from the productive sector of the economy to the merely politically-favored, but capital-sucking, sector.

      Al Gore arranges “meetings” for the managers of these startup companies with those in Washington in a position to help them, in exchange for “campaign contributions” (read, “bribes”).

      Is there still any question about the motivation behind the tea parties?

    13. Al, The Villages, Fl says:

      Cap and trade is one of the worst bills I have ever seen. It is pure taxation with an intent to levee taxes on all people including the 95% that think they are free of the presidents tax increases. So far, every move this administration/dem congress has made has been to move toward socialism, secure power and increase taxes to fund these moves. Although couched in terms of global warming, save the earth, recovery of the economy, independence from foreign oil etc. it has never been about any of those things and will do little, if anything, toward those goals.

    14. HOUSTON says:




    15. Keep The Change, FL says:

      It is imperative that Congress and other government officials know how you think about this "Cap and Tax" scam. The following should be sent to EVERY Government Official, whether local, state or federal. Wording can be changed depending on the level of govermnent. I have sent this to a number of Congressmen and received a few replies that indicate their opposition to "cap and tax".


      In order to help ________(your state) taxpayers and voters, of which I am one, I would like for you to make the following pledge (and keep it) for the good of this country and ________(your state). This type of legislation is an economy killer.

      I, _______________, pledge to the taxpayers of the state of _________ and to the American People that I will oppose any legislation relating to climate change/cap and tax that includes a net increase in state or local government revenue.

    16. Marshall Hill MI. says:

      Washington is currently Smoking Old Tennis Shoes!

    17. Pingback: Stop Federal Energy Tax ($10,000 a year for average US family) « Global Cooperative

    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.