Political News | Annuit Coeptis logo

Page added: 09:16 UTC, Tuesday, 30th June 2009
Subscribe to our Feedrss feed
Author: James Shott              Category: AC Analysis, Columns, Featured

Democrats ram largest-ever tax bill through House

Democrats+Control+CongressThe House of Representatives passed the 1,200-plus page Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade tax bill by a narrow margin as the last piece of business on Friday before heading home for the Fourth of July recess. Once again House members had to vote on a bill they hadn’t read, since co-sponsor Henry Waxman (D-CA) added a 300-page amendment just after 3 o’clock Friday morning.

Fearing the vote on the controversial American Clean Energy and Security Act – the largest tax increase in American history – would not go their way, Democrats called one lawmaker in from rehab to help out. According to The Hill, “In a clear sign that Democrats need every vote they can get on climate change legislation, Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) has returned from medical treatment for alcoholism to vote on the bill. Kennedy, who has missed every vote since going into rehab on June 12, was seen on the House floor talking to his Democratic colleagues.”

Among the 219 “Aye” votes were Mr. Kennedy and eight Republicans, all of whom did a disservice to their constituents. Among the 212 “No” votes were 44 Democrats who deserve recognition for seeing this measure as the disaster-in-waiting that it is.

With the final margin a very thin seven votes, the eight Republicans essentially passed the bill that The Heritage Foundation called “nothing more than an energy tax in disguise” that will raise the cost of electricity.

Even President Barack Obama acknowledges that the $65 billion tax will cause electricity costs to rise: “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket,” the President told the San Francisco Chronicle in January. Electric utilities, he said, “will have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will have to pass that money on to consumers.”

In addition to electricity costs cap-and trade will also increase the cost of everything that electricity and fossil fuels are used for, and those higher costs will produce job losses, an increase in the federal debt, and a weaker economy. “The reality is when all the tax impacts have been added up, the average per-family-of-four costs rise by $2,979 per year,” Heritage estimates. “In the year 2035 alone, the cost is $4,609. And the costs per family for the whole energy tax aggregated from 2012 to 2035 are $71,493.”

Democrats counter that according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Waxman-Markey would cost the average household only $175 a year by 2020. But critics point out that the CBO analysis looked only at the day-to-day costs of the program, and not at the entire set of economic consequences of energy restriction. A CBO footnote acknowledges as much: “The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap.”

Prior to the vote Friday, Michigan Republican Congressman Thaddeus McCotter told the House that “passing this abominable energy tax on working families in a recession shows this job-killing, budget-busting government doesn’t understand how much real Americans are hurting for work. This is the hubris of big government: the delusion that our families’ economic future rests in the manicured hands of Congress rather than in the hard-working hands of the American people. I disagree and I urge the rejection of this bill.”

Undaunted by the dire predictions of analysts, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) blundered forward with the vote, and won, if you can call heaping monumental additional costs on your constituents and other Americans “winning.” Some Democrats aren’t happy about this bill and even environmental groups are opposed to it because, despite all of the additional costs and other harm the amended version will heap on Americans, organizations like Greenpeace believe the form of the bill that was passed is too weak.

The good news is that the bill will have a much harder time in the Senate, and may not even be brought up for a vote.

Cap-and-trade is a scheme to push the U.S. toward “green,” renewable energy despite compelling evidence against mankind contributing significantly to global warming, or global cooling, whichever it is this week. As time passes, the manmade climate change theory is increasingly out of favor with both scientists and regular Americans.

Hardly anyone supports continuing to pour pollutants into the air when there are clean alternatives. The problem is that green alternatives are not viable alternatives; wind, solar and the other clean technologies aren’t well enough developed yet to replace coal, oil and natural gas as major energy sources, and they are more expensive than conventional energy. Trying to force their development by making conventional energy so expensive that no one can afford it is cruel, and trying to put green energy in place before it is ready is foolish.

July 4th is a few days away. There is no better time to look at over-reaching government efforts like cap-and-trade and healthcare reform and consider them in the context of why we celebrate the 4th of July. Everyone who understands the fundamental concepts of freedom that are behind the Declaration of Independence will reject both ideas.

Cross-posted at Observations

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Fleck
  • Propeller
  • Mixx
  • connotea
  • Furl
  • IndianPad
  • Faves
  • blogmarks
  • Folkd
  • LinkaGoGo
  • MisterWong

Tags: , , ,

  1. I must confess it – - for once, I find myself in agreement with Nancy Pelosi, who said this bill means “Jobs! Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!” She’s right and I have to give her credit.

    Unfortunately, those jobs are going to be in “China! India! Pakistan! Korea!” :p

  2. James Shott says:

    Hee-hee!

    I don’t believe ol’ Nancy, or many of her cohorts, understand that “making” jobs, whether they are so-called “green jobs” or make-work jobs like the CCC, is false job creation, and won’t last without real economic support.

    When ideology/idiology trumps common sense, we get what we’ve got.

  3. “I pledge that under my plan, no one making less than $250,000 a year will see any type of tax increase,” “Not income tax, not capital gains taxes, not any kind of tax.” – BARACK OBAMA

    LIAR!!!

  4. Tim Britt says:

    While I agree with the substance of your argument, that is, that the cap-and-trade program will result in an energy tax on consumers; I totally disagree that renewable energy sources are not well enough developed to replace a major portion of fossil fuel-generated energy. If you look to Europe (Germany and Spain in particular), they committed some time ago to renewable energy development and installation. In fact, a majority of the products produced in the US in the past few years (solar modules, inverters, etc.) have gone overseas to other countries who have taken a more progressive approach to their energy problems.

    Solar and Wind technology is not “rocket science.” It is simple, proven technology that works and can be implemented much more quickly (and economically) than building new fossil-fuel plants, or nuclear plants. I believe that the real obstacle is the utility companies, which wield much influence at the state government level. Renewable energy sources, particularly if installed at the consumer level, amount to a deregulated energy source and a loss of revenue for the utilities. Hence, the utilities and local governments have no real incentive to advocate for new technology. As a contractor who is trying to help reinvent ourselves and create or save jobs via the renewable energy market , it’s troubling that there is so much misinformation among the general public and no real government or utility support.

    If we can send men to space to live for months on end, we can figure out a way to make renewable energy a viable priority without taxing our country to death.

  5. NEPAConservative says:

    Tim we don’t have enough land for the amount of solar cells and wind turnbines needed to power a small city. None of these technologies can give us what nuclear can.

    Ausra’s Las Vegas solar thermal plant , a 130,000-square-foot facility, will only provide 700,000 megawatts per year while a nuclear power plant can produce Giga Watts per year in 1/3 of the space needed. It’s not even worth an investment if you don’t live somewhere where the sun is shining almost… like..um… all of the time. They built wind turbines right by my house, lots of them. Covered the mountain top. Maybe you’d like to explain why my energy bills have gone up? I look up and some of them aren’t even turning, what happens on the days that have no wind, do we run on “squirrel in the cage” power?

    I see potential in these technologies but after 20+ years of development, it’s small potential. Nuclear IS our best option.

    So why not do the smart thing. Grab more domestic oil while we build more nuclear power plants.

    In the meantime the DimWits are passing out CFL light bulbs and tying up every permit for a nuclear power plant out there.

  6. Tim Britt says:

    We may have to “agree to disagree” on your interpretation of the data as well as the need for “the sun to shine all of the time.” While I agree that nuclear can be a viable alternative, and perhaps we could follow Canada’s lead in increasing our portfolio, I suggest you do some more research on the viability of Solar PV and look at what countries like Germany (latitude of 51 degrees…further north than Michigan and roughly the same number of Peak Sun Hours) is doing. Canada (Ontario in particular) has also released a new initiative to spur growth. It may not power entire cities tomorrow, but consider this: if we do nothing but sit and talk about it, the situation will not improve. It’s likely that as the Solar PV (or any other renewable technology) demand increases, prices will come down and technology will improve…that is, as long as the patterns of history continue to repeat themselves. I continue to believe that the biggest enemies in this discussion are the utilities. As long as they control the delivery of the power and have influence over the state legislatures, we will always be at their mercy and they will ultimately decide how much of what technology advances.

  7. James Shott says:

    Tim:

    “It’s likely that as the Solar PV (or any other renewable technology) demand increases, prices will come down and technology will improve.”

    We need to have well developed technology before pushing the older, tried and true technologies off to the side. It makes no sense to force the new technologies into place until they are ready.

    Now, if we want to talk about incentivizing people to implement solar at home, and incentivize municipalities and states to implement other forms, that’s a different matter.

    What we don’t want to do is to force — through higher costs on conventional energy and obstacles to acquiring new supplies of oil and gas — the implementation of immature energy technologies, hoping that at some point the technology will improve and become less expensive, as the administration and Congress are trying to do.

    “I continue to believe that the biggest enemies in this discussion are the utilities. As long as they control the delivery of the power and have influence over the state legislatures, we will always be at their mercy and they will ultimately decide how much of what technology advances.”

    Perhaps you are unaware that the leading developers of alternative energy technologies are the oil and gas companies. Of course, they will sensibly resist shutting down the existing technologies sooner than necessary because of the tremendous investment that has been made in it, but they would be foolish to ignore new technologies




:p 8) :lol: =( :8 ;) :(( :o: :[ :) :D :-| :-[) :bloody: :cool: :choler: :love: :oups: :aie: :beurk:

Related Stories

Latest Headlines

Also In The News

The grassroots Tea Party movement flummoxes the left thumbnail
An Open Letter from the Israeli Ambassador to UC-Irvine Students thumbnail
Gun Grabbers & The 14th Amendment thumbnail

Bad Behavior has blocked 533 access attempts in the last 7 days.