Sunday, October 04, 2009

Cap and trade in the news

Last week Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) introduced a cap and trade bill. Their version of the national energy tax offers a goal of cutting carbon emissions down by 20 percent by 2020--cute numbers. But that cuteness, if it becomes law, will stifle economic growth and inhibit job growth.

Let's take a look at some cap and trade news.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), who opposes cap and trade, sees little chance of it becoming law in 2009, which will mean Barack Obama will make a second disappointing trip to Copenhagen--he'll arrive empty handed at the The United Nations Climate Change Conference, which takes place in the Danish capital in December.

The struggling airline industry has doubts about cap and trade.

In Texas, Jim Eastland, the chairman of the state House Energy Resources Committee called cap and trade, "most far-reaching, insidious" ideas every proposed by Congress.

Closer to my home, the Galesburg Mail-Record reports that the BNSF Railroad is "worried about the effect a proposed cap and trade bill could have on the coal industry, one of the biggest parts of the railroad giant's business."

BNSF is Galesburg's largest employer.

What will cap and trade cost? Obama's Treasury Department estimates that the energy tax will cost the average American household $1,700 a year.

Technorati tags:
at

3 comments:

  1. Unknown6:42 AM

    Cap and trade legislation will greatly impact the life of every American. The price of everything from the electricity we use in our homes to the food we put on our tables will increase significantly. On top of that, millions of jobs will be lost across the country. Visit http://tiny.cc/pxIgi to voice opposition to this devastating legislation.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Poi.ball.23:17 PM

    You need to keep your eye on the EPA and what they think they can do to enact Crap and Trade with out a vote.

    "Sources that would be required to install pricey "best available control technology" would increase to 41,000 per year, up from 300 today, while those subject to the EPA's construction permitting would jump to 6.1 million from 14,000."

    Can anyone imagine how many new Federal employees it would take to process over 6ix million new EPA construction permits a year? No Crap and trade vote needed. Just enact new rules under the present laws and presto: All American private industry grinds to a halt.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Poi.ball.23:20 PM

    The link for my above comment about the EPA, from the Wall Street Journal.

    Link

    ReplyDelete