Cap in Trade; Climate Tax Bill; Waxman-Markey Climate Change Bill

You may have heard these terms being tossed around, liberals claiming we need this to control energy utilization and conservatives rejecting it on merit as a simple veiled attempt to increase taxes. In essence, you really need to look at the bill, state of the economy and political arena to identify what is truly at stake here.

            Its no secrete that Obama is an environmentalist or at least buys into the theory that businesses and the American economy have an obligation to the “green” movement. He is willing to seek alternative approaches to restrict technological advancement and progression of fossil energy resources. Whether of not you believe in the theory of “global warming” you can see that this Waxman-Markey climate bill is intended to be a revenue stream for this administration. Essentially, the bill would introduce a revenue model into the Federal Government capacity (Air) and allows them to tax it. Simply said, that is the intent of the bill. Now the government would use this authority to cap carbon emissions an individual or company could exude in a given year and anyone who exceeded this set limit could either pay a tax/fine or buy caps from other companies. Simply, this creates a market out of thin air for something we all are using today.

            But there are environmental benefits right? The bill aims to cap greenhouse gas emissions at 17% of 2005 levels which climatologists calculate a 5 one hundredths of a degree change by the year 2050. To get this 5/100^th (.005) of a degree change over the next 40 YEARS, we as energy users will need to submit:

• Raise electricity rates 90%
• Raise Gas prices 58%
• Raise Natural Gas Prices 55%
• Raise Avg family energy bill 1,241

*Just the cost to consumers** Additional costs on business who will filter their increased costs onto the products/services we purchase***Adjusted for inflation

 So is this an environmental bill or a tax bill? With the socialized medicine debate just around the corner, and less then 1/5^th of the money allocated to pay for it, I submit that this is a revenue model aimed to filter money to that effort while satisfying the environmentalists with a veiled form of diplomacy.  

 David Kreuitzer @ Heritage Foundation submits:

• Bill will raise energy prices over $1,900 per household for a family of four.
• Generates 5.7 Trillion in tax revenue through 2035

 Since we are in new politics, and special interest cannot be in the White House (in Obama’s own words), this bill marks 85% of the revenue received from this bill will go directly to special interest and not going into treasury. This is called the value of special allowances and accounts for “placing manufacturing” at a disadvantage.

This 1800 Bill with a 300 page amendment will be briefly debated and in a few months when people start complaining about their high energy prices you will hear our Reps say “I did not have time to read the bill”. Well I reject that statement. I elected you to represent me and my family. If it’s so important (just like in TARP) you need to read and understand everything you are asking me to pay for!