President Obama’s recent speech on “climate change” indicated that there’s a lot he wants to do to prevent global warming. But what is he willing to sacrifice to do so? And – perhaps the more important question – will he get his desired results? Remember, in life, there are tradeoffs. A prudent politician should know this. Heritage explains that his plan will harm American families.
In typical Obama fashion, the President tugged on our heartstrings as he started his speech with grandiose words about the Earth’s beauty. He set the stage for us by presenting what is at stake, “beautiful; breathtaking; a glowing marble of blue oceans, and green forests, and brown mountains brushed with white clouds.”
All that beauty is what he’s set out to save, apparently. Next came the threat.
Mr. Obama proceeded to up the intensity, relaying what scientists began to warn us in the 1950’s – you might want to hold your breath for this one – if carbon dioxide reaches a certain level, rising levels might someday “disrupt the fragile balance that makes our planet so hospitable.” “[T]he levels of carbon pollution in our atmosphere have increased dramatically,” he added.
Today, President Obama gave a major address outlining the White House’s “sweeping initiative to counter the affects [sic] of global warming.” This morning The Heritage Foundation’s Nick Loris debated Neera Tanden of the Center for American Progress about the actions the President has taken thus far and about cap-and-trade legislation.
At a press conference, Heritage Action’s CEO Michael Needham explained proponents of a carbon tax understand the best defense is a strong, aggressive offense. By pushing an unacceptable carbon tax, they want to distract lawmakers, the media and the American people away from the real issues: overspending and a lack of access to American energy resources.
In the bubble of the Washington Beltway, key players are eager to stem the so-called “fiscal cliff.” Meanwhile, various special interests continue the murmur of using a “carbon tax” as part of the negotiations, or to use as a revenue raiser (i.e., tax increase) within the context of future tax reform.
Yesterday, Senator David Vitter (R-LA) and Congressman Mike Pompeo (R-KS), incoming ranking member of the important Senate Environment & Public Works Committee and member Energy & Commerce Committee respectfully, plan to introduce a concurrent resolution in both chambers expressing the sense of Congress “that a carbon tax is not in the economic interests of the United States.”
As Senator Vitter notes, “There’s a lot of talk in Washington about raising taxes, and finding ‘revenues’ in creative ways, to avoid going over the fiscal cliff. But a carbon tax — which would force more financial hardship upon family budgets, energy consumers and jobs seekers — needs to be completely taken off the table.” And Congressman Pompeo stated “A carbon tax would be disastrous to our nation’s economy by driving up energy prices and increasing the cost of everything built in America, as well consumer goods purchased by every American.”