Logo

Cap and Trade

I am a strong supporter of environmental stewardship, but the benefits of the Democrat's Cap and Trade plan are too low and the costs to Americans too high.

Cap and trade is one way to attempt to manage pollution - most notably carbon dioxide.  In its current form the Democrats want to force companies who emit pollution to buy permits to release more pollution than what they are allotted.  Those who emit less can sell their unused allotment to others who emit more.  Cap-and-trade has been tried in Europe, and has had no affect whatsoever on CO2 emissions, but it has had a harmful effect on the economy. 

The Democrats are asking consumers to pick up the tab for the cost of their bill.  It's been estimated that the current cap and trade proposal will raise a single household's energy bill by 77 to 129 percent.  That means if you're energy bill is $160 a month, under this bill, it could soar to $390 per month.  It will increase gas prices, food prices, consumer product prices, and the cost of government. 

Even President Obama Admitted "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket" under his cap-and-trade program (January 2008).  Anyone using a car, public transportation, electricity or any product that involves creating CO2 would face higher prices.  Under this plan families can expect to pay an additional $3,000 in energy costs per year.

The additional costs the Democrats are asking to taxpayers to bear is all done to affect one one-hundredth of a degree in global warming.  Again, the benefits of the Democrat's cap and trade plan are too low and the costs to Americans too high.

We need meaningful solutions, which is why I am a sponsor of the American Energy Act.  This bill will increase American energy production made by American workers, encourage greater efficiency and conservation, and promote the use of clean, alternative fuels. 

Kerry/Lieberman Cap and Trade Bill: Bad For America

Recently, Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman unveiled their version of the House’s cap and trade bill, which passed the House by a slim margin last June. Despite a few notable improvements – the Senate version streamlines the permitting process for nuclear power generation, and would allow for additional domestic oil exploration – this bill inflicts the same sort of damage on the U.S. economy and American taxpayer as the House passed cap and trade bill. Detailed below are some of its more problematic features:

•Rolls Back the Clock: Kerry/Lieberman requires that we lower carbon emission levels by 80 percent by 2050, a level unattainable without a dramatic scale back of the U.S. economy. How dramatic would this scale back be? The last time carbon emissions were as low as Kerry/Lieberman mandates, the year was 1875. To put things in perspective, our economy was 97 times smaller than it is today.

•Destroys Jobs: Kerry/Lieberman will destroy jobs. A Heritage Foundation study of cap and trade found that passage of such a bill would result in net job losses of 1.9 million by 2012. Manufacturing sectors would be especially hard hit, shedding 400,000 jobs between 2012 and 2035. Additional studies found that our economy would take a serious hit – a total loss of $5.2 trillion from 2012-2035 – if a cap and trade system were passed. If Kerry/Lieberman is passed, we can expect a stagnated economy and job destruction.

•Raises Your Bill: Kerry/Lieberman will raise your energy bill. Because the sources of energy that this cap and trade bill mandates be used are significantly less efficient than the fossil fuels they’ll be replacing, Americans can expect to be hit each month by an inflated energy bill. According to a recent Renewable Energy Standard study carried out by the Heritage Foundation, a typical family of four can expect to see their electricity bills jump by $2,400 a year.

Even the authors of the bill have backed away from claims that this is a climate change bill. As Senator Kerry recently said of his cap and trade legislation: "What we are talking about is a jobs bill. It is not a climate bill." Unfortunately, it’s neither; it’s a tax on the American people and a burden on the U.S. economy.