Global Warming “Shell Games”

Patrick Bell / February 04, 2009

Congressman John Shimkus (R-IL) is a member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee. He took time this week to answer questions from U.S. Fulbright Fellow Patrick Bell.

1. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the new Chair of the Energy & Commerce Committee, has said he would like to have global warming legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions passed out of committee by Memorial Day. What might be some of the sticking points to following that timeline?

This is a huge undertaking. A bill that would monetize carbon has far reaching consequences. This isn’t something to be taken lightly and trying to push something through by holding to an arbitrary date to produce the bill is not responsible. The Energy and Commerce Committee is very diverse in representation. I would hope, and will try my best to encourage, fossil fuel Democrats to protect their own constituents.

2. At the first hearing of the Energy & Commerce Committee during the new Congress, you called cap-and-trade proposals a “shell game.” Please expand on what you meant by that.

Cap and Trade is a shell game because it hides what is happening. When you monetize carbon, someone is going to pay for it. Saying it is cap and trade makes people (consumers) believe that big business is paying for it; however, we all know that these businesses will increase utility rates or manufactured goods’ prices to pay for this increase in costs. If we want to be intellectually honest, it should be a carbon tax. While I do not support a carbon tax either, it is the only way to be upfront with consumers.

3. What effects do you believe cap-and-trade legislation would have on coal abundant states? Would there be particular negative impacts to your district, or other parts of the Midwest? (more…)