FACT CHECK: CAP-AND-TRADE IS A TAX

Tuesday September 22, 2009

First, it is undeniable that the whole point of cap-and-trade is to raise energy prices. As the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) put it, higher prices are “essential to the success of a cap and-trade program because they would be the most important mechanism through which businesses and households would be encouraged to make economically motivated changes in investment and consumption that reduced CO2 emissions.” As then candidate Obama stated in January 2008, "under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket....Because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money, they will pass that money on to consumers."

If that doesn’t quite get the point across, consider Peter Orszag, when, as director of CBO, he said that under “a cap-and-trade program, firms would not ultimately bear most of the costs of the allowances but instead would pass them along to their customers in the form of higher prices. Such price increases would stem from the restriction on emissions and would occur regardless of whether the government sold emission allowances or gave them away” [emphasis added].
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, proposed an amendment to the FY2010 Interior Appropriations Act restricting funds for one year from being used to cut off water to California’s Central Valley. Environmentalists have used the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to stem the flow of water to the region's farming community, which produces 13% of the U.S. food supply and over half of the nation’s fruit and vegetables in order to protect a 3-inch fish called the Delta Smelt.

“What started out as a local water problem in California is quickly developing into a food problem for the nation,” said Senator DeMint. “This region is vital to our nation's food supply; it produces most of our fruits and vegetables. If we don’t address this problem now, not only will thousands of people remain out of work in California, but everyone in the country will pay higher food prices.”

“Congress has faced similar problems with the Endangered Species Act before, and each time we intervened to help our people. We must be good stewards of the environment, but our government's priority must be the health and welfare of our people. We cannot allow our food supply and our economy to be held hostage by extreme environmentalists.”

Inhofe Pans Obama Climate Speech

Tuesday September 22, 2009

Reaction to President Obama’s speech on climate change this morning in New York is pouring in from across the political spectrum.

On the right, Sen. James Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican, plans to deliver his own speech in Congress this afternoon arguing that the President’s speech “fell short of expectations, offering only talk of rising sea levels and climate refugees, with no constructive solutions for the challenges ahead.”

Mr. Inhofe — who has called the threat of global warming the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” — will argue that the talks to develop a climate treaty in Copenhagen have been “marred by failure.” A draft of his speech says:

Inhofe Reacts on Twitter to Obama Speech

Tuesday September 22, 2009

Posted by Matt Dempsey matt_dempsey@epw.senate.gov

Are you following InhofePress on Twitter?

Inhofe on Obama UN Climate Speech: "Short Obama speech signals little momentum for new climate treaty leading up to Copenhagen."

http://twitter.com/inhofepress

Also, Senator Inhofe will deliver a Floor speech this afternoon speaking about the Obama speech as well as the upcoming UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen. Email or call with questions.

The Senate climate debate has largely been in standby mode since June, but Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is ready to kick-start the process with the release next week of a draft bill.

Sources off Capitol Hill say they expect Boxer to start legislative hearings during the week of Oct. 5, with a tentative markup penciled in for the week of Oct. 12.

Of course, much depends on the fate of the Senate health care bill, just how quick U.S. EPA can turn around an economic analysis of Boxer's legislation and whether the chairwoman wants to satisfy key moderates on her panel, which include Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Arlen Specter (D-Pa.).

Some Democrats say the climate bill actually has some advantages by being stuck behind health care.

"We always talk about silver linings," Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) said last week. "The fact we've slowed down on health care I think gives us a chance to do a better job on the clean energy front. We need to take advantage of that."

Speaking on the Senate Floor on Thursday, Senator Inhofe welcomed news that Democratic leadership is now publicly saying that consideration of the costly cap-and-trade bill may very well slip to next year. (Watch Inhofe Floor Statement Here) As the leading critic of cap-and-trade legislation in the Senate for nearly a decade, Senator Inhofe has long said Senate passage this year was nearly impossible. That said, Senator Inhofe also warned that the likes of Al Gore, Hollywood, and the United Nations would continue to push Democrats to take up the debate in the Senate. Inhofe vowed again this week that he would keep up the battle and continue to expose the tremendous cost of cap-and-trade legislation.
The Oklahoma congressional delegation expressed concern Thursday that a federal agency is moving away from a successful voluntary program tied to Tulsa's water quality.

In a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, the delegation said Oklahoma's $9 million investment in the program since 2003 has resulted in a 66 percent reduction in phosphorus levels in Beaty Creek.

That creek is a tributary to the Eucha-Spavinaw watershed, the primary water supply for Tulsa.

Moving to assuage concerns about the potential costs of capping U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer has included an allowance "price collar" provision in climate change legislation she is drafting that would establish maximum and minimum prices for emission allowances in the early years of the cap-and-trade program the bill would create, The Energy Daily has learned.

The draft legislation, which Boxer (D-Calif.) plans to introduce at the end of the month, would establish an initial allowance price ceiling of $28 per metric ton of carbon dioxide and a price floor of $11, with the prices adjusted upwards annually thereafter, according to a source familiar with the measure.

Under the provision, if heavy demand pushed allowance market prices above the $28 ceiling, the government would borrow allowances from future years and sell them to regulated entities at the ceiling price, a move that in theory would reduce demand for allowances and lower prices.

The minimum, or floor, price would ensure that government-administered allowance auctions generate sufficient revenues to fund climate change adaptation efforts, for example, and other climate change-related public benefits.

Details of Boxer's draft emerged as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) signaled Tuesday that climate change legislation is unlikely to come to the Senate floor until late in the year given the Senate's crowded schedule, which includes health care and financial services reform legislation and a number of appropriations bills.

Reid's pronouncement notwithstanding, Boxer is expected to hold hearings on her legislation in early October and move it through her committee later that month.

Boxer signaled in early August she was considering including a price collar in her legislation, a move clearly aimed at addressing concerns by a number of Democratic senators over the past two months that limiting carbon emissions could harm the U.S. economy by driving up the costs of energy and consumer products.

U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe warned Wednesday that Tulsa County and at least eight other Oklahoma counties will face severe restrictions on economic development if the Obama administration follows through with revisions on smog standards.

"I am proud that over the past few years we have made tremendous progress in cleaning up our air in Oklahoma," Inhofe said, adding that not a single county in the state is now in violation of ozone standards. "But if EPA follows through on its action, Oklahoma communities will face severe restrictions on their ability to grow and promote economic development."

Inhofe was reacting to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson's announcement that her agency will reconsider 2008 smog standards.

An inevitability of writing about controversial political topics is that you're bound to see nastygrams from someone who doesn't especially care for what you've written.

After I wrote an article yesterday reporting on the Obama administration's private estimate of the cost of a cap and trade law, the good folks at the liberal Center for American Progress (John Podesta's group) decided they didn't care for it very much.

My article said: "The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year, the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about 15 percent... the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration's estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year." Cap and trade is, of course, the idea of pollution credits, meaning that a pollution limit is established and industries can sell the right to emit carbon to each other.

So the Center for American Progress replied by posting a response alleging I was "promot[ing] another false CEI attack on clean energy reform."