America is going on a big energy diet.
Cap and Trade is the policy that our government is pursuing to force Americans to limit the amount of carbon dioxide that we produce. The problem is that America relies on CO2 emitting fuel sources for 85 percent of its energy. So to force us to use less, the government wants to impose an emissions tax that makes using fossil fuel too expensive. The idea is to put America on an energy diet through forced consumption reduction. Even after changing their consumption, Americans will pay dearly:
But the high costs must be worth it, right? After all, we’re saving the planet…
If there were environmental benefits from Waxman-Markey, then maybe we could debate it.
But there aren’t.
So why is the government going do this then?
Well, let’s just say that they won’t need parking tickets anymore.
What’s this really about? Although euphemistically referred to as “climate revenue,” such a massive tax on energy consumption is bound to bring in a lot of money in tax revenue. Some politicians suggest rebate checks would offset the rise in energy costs but this scenario is highly unlikely to help most Americans. Rebates or not, the higher energy prices would reduce economic activity by forcing businesses to cut costs elsewhere, possibly by reducing their workforce, and thus doing damage that no check would cover. We turn to Kreutzer once again:
Higher energy prices, lost jobs, lost income and one of the government’s largest tax revenue generators – all for a change in the temperature we’ll never notice anyway. That’s a deal breaker. For more, visit Heritage’s rapid response page.