Congressional Democrats contemplate bringing back cap and tax…… as just a straight tax

More craziness from the hill today, as congressional democrats are contemplating the return of cap and tax. Except this time, it’s mainly about taxing:

Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) introduced legislation Thursday that would tax carbon emissions, sparking criticism from the GOP.

The price on carbon would ramp up over time to incentivize greenhouse gas emission reductions, McDermott said in a statement. He said the bill would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 80 percent compared with 2005 levels within 42 years.

A quarter of those carbon fees would go toward deficit reduction, with the remaining portion used to offset price increases.

?The American people care about the deficit and they?re worried about climate change — and we can fix both without hurting the economy,? McDermott said in a statement. ?My bill would reduce carbon emissions, and it returns all the money to consumers and deficit reduction. Businesses want this kind of predictability, consumers need to be protected, and we need to step up and address our climate and fiscal issues.?

Republicans opposed the effort precisely because of the economy.

“It’s hard to believe that Democrats in Washington are introducing an energy tax on consumers, especially as Americans are out of work and the economy remains sluggish,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the ranking member on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said in a statement Thursday. “A carbon tax will mean consumers will pay more at the pump and more for energy in their homes. An energy tax is the last thing that Congress should be considering.?

Read it all here.

Another great reason to vote Republican this year.

4 Replies to “Congressional Democrats contemplate bringing back cap and tax…… as just a straight tax”

  1. Anonymous


    “Don’t be so scared just because Democrats are in charge.” – FORMER Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin

  2. duggersd

    What is wrong with this plan? Currently, CO2 emissions are down, mostly due to natural gas fracking. These emissions are down to the levels of the mid 1990’s So, this guy is offering a bill that already has CO2 emissions, which is the main ingredient in greenhouse gases, below where he wants them. And we don’t even know that the so-called greenhouse effect actually exists!

  3. MJL

    Mike Huckabee told a Clean Air Cool Planet gathering in New Hampshire in 2007, “I also support cap-and-trade of carbon emissions, and I was disappointed when the Senate rejected it.”

    John McCain supported cap-and trade as a Republican presidential candidate, after he pushed for it in a bill he coauthored with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.).

    in 2005 Romney supported an early emissions-capping system

    Newt Gingrich, meanwhile, told Frontline in 2007 that “I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.): I have no problem with trading as long as you don?t devastate the economy. This is what solved acid rain. Some people on my side say, ?Just create incentives.? I say that?s opening up the Treasury to every group in the country. I want to set emission standards and let the best technology win.

    Wall Street Journal: the Bush Administration should propose a domestic cap-and-trade program for carbon dioxide that could, of course, be easily expanded to Canada and Mexico. And then to Latin America. And then the world.

    Your right, Cap and trade is a horrible Democrat idea (much like the individual mandate developed and passed by Romney or Socialized Medicine supported by Nixon.)

  4. Katzy

    Unfortunately, we are now living under a commander in chief/dictator who has said that he wants energy prices to “necessarily skyrocket,” and if the useful idiots in Congress go along, he is more than happy to sign it. Or if they don’t, he will just issue another executive order. Here’s a few thoughts on the hyprocisy of Al Gore and his green-ness and the real reasons behind cap and tax.

    “This brings us to a third, and most dangerous, lie of all–a fallacy that compelling evidence exists linking “unprecedented” climate warming to fossil CO2 emissions since the Industrial Revolution arising from an atmospheric “greenhouse effect.”

    “And what redemptive solutions are urgently implored? We must implement carbon cap-and-trade legislation; give lots of money to the U.N. to redistribute, and empower them to preside over world governments; abandon fossil fuel use in favor of heavily subsidized but assuredly abundant, “free,” and “renewable” alternatives; and empower expanding government bureaucracies to protect us from free market excesses. These include the same agencies that declared CO2 a “pollutant” (something rain forests certainly dispute), and that listed polar bears as a threatened species (despite expanding populations), presumably to discourage public support for oil and gas drilling in ANWR.

    “Who stands to gain from the politics of corrupt climate science? There are many culprits, and they are becoming ever more powerful. Principal among them are certain agenda-driven federal government regulatory agencies; alternative energy and environmental lobbies; a captive multibillion-dollar per year climate science industry; cap-and-trade marketers; large, associated special-interest hedge fund managers; and yes, the U.N. and other organizations seeking global resource and wealth redistribution.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.