The difference between the price of a gallon of milk at a local grocery store and a corner market or convenient store may be modest, but add it up over the course of a few years, as well as paying higher prices for the rest of your groceries, and the difference is quite sizeable. That’s the theme of DeNeen Brown’s article in today’s Washington Post, asserting that the poor do not have supermarkets to walk to and thus pay a premium for most goods they buy: Prices in urban corner …
A national energy tax, which masks as a cap-and-trade program, could produce a substantial public backlash. According to a recent CNN poll, a majority of Americans already believe that such a job-killing energy tax that produces little or no environmental gain is not a good idea. This is not the first time our nation’s policymakers have toyed with an unpopular energy tax, though. Rewind to 1993. With a large majority and emboldened by the election of President Bill Clinton, House Democrats advocated and passed (barely) a national energy tax known …
If former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, the greenest of all the greens, the man who played an integral role in starting the Environmental Protection Agency and passing the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, opposes cap and trade, it’s probably not a good idea. Here’s what Nader told the New York Times concerning cap and trade: I mean, it’s not going to work. It’s too complex. It’s too easily manipulated politically. Right now, they’re having a battle over whether they can even auction the credits off for money. The industry …
The economic costs associated with a cap and trade policy are real. Republicans and Democrats alike realize this and have urged caution that a bill must protect American consumers and businesses. One idea floating around to protect American business and manufacturers is a protectionist carbon tariff. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu appears to be open to the idea: Energy Secretary Steven Chu on Tuesday advocated adjusting trade duties as a ‘weapon’ to protect U.S. manufacturing, just a day after one of China’s top climate envoys warned of a trade war …
When it comes global warming, two debates are currently taking place. At the forefront is the political debate. Current legislation introduced by House Democrats Ed Markey and Henry Waxman includes a cap-and-trade plan to attempt to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. But the debate unfortunately (and like most political debates) has largely evolved into each party talking past each other. In fact, even Democrats have been talking past each other, which forced Chairman Waxman to bypass subcommittee markup and moving to full committee to keep the bill moving …
The reason cap-and-trade and carbon tax have been used interchangeably in the global warming debate is because they are essentially the same thing: a massive tax on energy. Although a more direct approach would be to tax carbon dioxide, it does not make it any more acceptable. But this tax is different because the revenue generated will be given back to the people, presumably. When has that happened? Can we honestly believe every dollar extracted from Americans from a cap-and-trade or a carbon tax will be given back in the …
Global warming skeptics are quick to point out the exorbitant costs of global warming legislation because they are, well, exorbitant. The $1.9 trillion of tax revenue generated over eight years from a cap-and-trade bill would still be larger than the $1.5 trillion from NASA, the New Deal, and Hurricane Katrina. It amounts to a nearly $2,000 tax every year for every American household. Projected job losses that would have resulted from the Lieberman-Warner cap and trade would have surpassed 900,000 in some years. But if it saves the planet, isn’t …
On April 20, President Obama called for $100 million in budget cuts after announcing spending increases of $4 trillion. Heritage Senior Policy Analyst Brian Riedl breaks it down nicely: • It is 1/40,000 of the federal budget; • It is 1/7,830 the size of the recent “stimulus” bill; • It would close 1/1,845 of this year’s budget deficit; • It is the amount the federal government spends every 13 minutes; and • For a family earning $40,000 annually, it is the equivalent of cutting $1 from their family budget. But …
Policymakers in Washington want to dramatically change America’s energy policy by regulating carbon dioxide emissions. Their most popular idea, included in the Waxman-Markey 2009 energy bill, is a cap and trade proposal. Many Americans find the debate in Washington over adopting a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon dioxide a bit confusing. It works like this: Policymakers set a cap on the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that can be omitted into the atmosphere. Each power plant, factory, refinery, and other regulated entity will be allocated allowances (rights …
