Congressional Budget Office Says Cap and Trade Would Slow U.S. Economy

An article in the Washington Post today reports CBO Director Douglas W. Elmendorf “testified before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that the cap-and-trade provisions of the House bill -- in which emitters of greenhouse gases would be able to buy and sell pollution credits -- would cut the nation's gross domestic product by 0.25 to 0.75 percent in 2020 compared with ‘what it would otherwise have been,’ and by 1 to 3.5 percent in 2050.”

More on the Senate Cap and Trade Bill

The Democrats’ Plan for a National Energy Tax:

The energy policy proposed by President Obama, as well as House and Senate Democrats, is nothing more than a national energy tax that will lead to more taxes, fewer jobs and more government intrusion into your lives and businesses. The majority of the burden to pay for the Senate Democrats' cap and tax nightmare will be the poor, who spend a greater portion of their income on energy than other economic groups. According to one independent estimate, 2.3 to 2.7 million jobs will be lost each year for the next twenty years, as a result of the Democrat national energy tax.

New estimate about Cap and Trade's cost should alarm working Americans

CBS' "Taking Liberties" blog has an interesting post on a recently disclosed document from the Treasury Department highlighting the expected costs of Cap and Trade legislation on the U.S. economy. The report showed that cap and trade legislation supported by President Obama and congressional Democrats could cost the average American family $1,716 a year and represent the same as a 15 percent increase in the marginal tax rate.

From the blog:

"The FOIA'd document written by Judson Jaffe, who joined the Treasury Department's Office of Environment and Energy in January 2009, says: "Given the administration's proposal to auction all emission allowances, a cap-and-trade program could generate federal receipts on the order of $100 to $200 billion annually." (Obviously, any final cap-and-trade system may be different from what Obama had proposed, and could yield higher or lower taxes.)

Because personal income tax revenues bring in around $1.37 trillion a year, a $200 billion additional tax would be the equivalent of a 15 percent increase a year. A $100 billion additional tax would represent a 7 or 8 percent increase a year.

One odd point: The document written by Jaffee includes this line: "It will raise energy prices and impose annual costs on the order of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX." The Treasury Department redacted the rest of the sentence with a thick black line."

What cap and trade means to homeowners - it's not pretty

The cap and trade bill was over a thousand pages when it reached the floor of the House for a vote. At 3:00am the night before debate, Democrats filed a manager's amendment to the bill that contained hundreds of pages of technical changes with virtually no time to read and digest what those changes would mean for the average American consumer. Now that the dust has settled from the House vote, information is beginning to leak out on what is actually in the cap and trade bill as passed by the House. With each passing day, it becomes even more clear why Congressman Shuster voted no on cap and trade.

One of the arguments made by House Republicans during the debate on cap and trade was that it stamped a one-size fits all mandate for home energy efficiency standards with a load of unfunded mandates on the states. Essentially, it would take California's building code and apply it to all 50 states, from Maine to Alaska and Pennsylvania. A post on the American Issues Project's blog goes into more detail on what this actually means to homeowners. If you own a home, or are in the market for a home, read this post.

Hat tip: American Issues Project

Posted by: Press Secretary

The Daily Truth about the Democrats’ Cap and Tax Proposal

The Federal Government Wants to Tell You How to Build Your House

What the bill does: The House-passed bill establishes a national building code for commercial and residential buildings, requiring a 30 percent reduction in energy use immediately after passage and an additional 50 percent reduction in energy use by 2014 for residential buildings and 2015 for commercial buildings (Bill as report Sec. 201, p. 297).

What this means for consumers: Bureaucrats in Washington D.C. will tell you how to build your house. This will also create a whole new bureaucracy in Washington and more intrusion into the lives of Americans.

Video of Leader Boehner shedding light on the Cap and Tax bill on the House Floor

On Friday, the House narrowly passed cap and trade legislation - the largest national energy tax every passed by the House of Representatives. Before the vote, GOP Leader Boehner took to the floor to try to inform the House and the American people about what was in a 300 plus page amendment to the Democrats' cap and trade bill - an amendment that was dropped in the House in the dead of night (3:00am to be exact). Below please find video of Leader Boehner's floor speech. Congressman Shuster voted NO on cap and trade.

Click here for a full transcript of Boehner's remarks

Shuster Rejects Democrats’ Stifling National Energy Tax

Congressman Shuster released the following statement in opposition to the Democrats’ misguided and economically perilous cap and trade legislation:

"There is a disconnect between what President Obama and congressional Democrats in Washington want and what my constituents in Pennsylvania need. The government is spending money and racking up debt at a dizzying pace. Unemployment is nearing double digits. Instead of focusing on the challenges that directly affect American families, the President and Speaker Pelosi are racing to pass a massive national energy tax that does nothing to help the environment, but would stifle our economic growth.

In order to attempt to reduce global temperatures by only two tenths of a degree by the end of the Century, the Democrats are willing to impose a massive energy tax that will force families, farmers, and drivers to pay hundreds and thousands of dollars in higher power bills, higher heating and cooling bills, higher food and goods prices and higher gas prices.

There is no escape from this tax. At home, the national energy tax will cost the average Pennsylvania family $3,100 more in annual electric bills alone and 77 cents per gallon at the pump. At work, Americans will see increased unemployment as jobs, by some estimates millions of jobs, get shipped overseas to countries like China and India because it’s just too expensive to keep them at home.

Cap and trade is poisonous to our economic vitality. Reducing global temperatures by a fraction of a degree by the end of the Century should not cost Americans jobs, opportunity and economic freedom. We need a comprehensive energy plan, not a national energy tax. Instead of penalizing energy use, I support a Republican plan for a cleaner, cheaper, safer alternative energy called the American Energy Act.”

The American Energy Act:

• House Republicans recognize that as gas prices and home utility bills rise, American families are dealt an even greater economic hardship.

• The Democrats' answer to the worst recession in decades is a national energy tax that will lead to higher energy prices and further job losses.

• The American people deserve better. The American Energy Act is an all of the above plan that will provide energy independence, more jobs here at home, and a cleaner environment.

• The American Energy Act increases our domestic supply of energy by lifting restrictions on ANWR, the Outer Continental Shelf, and oil shale in the Mountain West.

• The House Republican plan renews America's commitment to clean and emissions-free nuclear energy. The Department of Energy has stated the best way for utility companies to reduce carbon emissions is to increase their supply of nuclear energy.

For more information on Cap and Trade, please visit Congressman Shuster’s blog at www.billsblogpa09.blogspot.com.

Morning Must Reads

National News:

WSJ Editorial by Kim Strassel: The Climate Change Climate Change

Politico Op-Ed by Rep. Sensenbrenner: Bill Will Shift Billions Overseas

WSJ Op-Ed by John Calfee: The Dangers of Fannie May Health Care

Posted by: Press Secretary

Video of Shuster on Cap and Trade a.k.a. the National Energy Tax

Congressman Shuster speaks about cap and trade

The Democrats' #1 Priority - National Energy Tax

In a time of economic uncertainty, when unemployment is nearing 10% and spending by House Democrats is out of control, what is Speaker Pelosi's number one priority? A national energy tax.

Wall Street Journal hits the mark with "Cap and Tax Fiction"

The Wall Street Journal hit the mark today in its editorial on the Democrats' cap and trade bill which is expected to be considered for a vote tomorrow or Saturday (the vote depends on whether Speaker Pelosi can hold together a fragile coalition of liberal Democrats and moderates in her party). The editorial "Cap and Tax Fiction" does a great job in explaining how much this national energy tax will actually cost by cutting through the smoke and mirrors of the Democrats' rhetoric and fudged numbers. Here is a quick sample from the piece:

"The hit to GDP is the real threat in this bill. The whole point of cap and trade is to hike the price of electricity and gas so that Americans will use less. These higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills or at the gas station but in every manufactured good, from food to cars. Consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created or higher unemployment. Some companies will instead move their operations overseas, with the same result.

When the Heritage Foundation did its analysis of Waxman-Markey, it broadly compared the economy with and without the carbon tax. Under this more comprehensive scenario, it found Waxman-Markey would cost the economy $161 billion in 2020, which is $1,870 for a family of four. As the bill's restrictions kick in, that number rises to $6,800 for a family of four by 2035."

Read the entire editorial here.

Top ten reasons the Democrats' cap and trade bill is bad for America

Top ten reasons the Democrats' cap and trade bill is bad for America

Courtesy of the Republican Leader's office and gop.gov

1. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Impose a National Energy Tax on Every Single American.

2. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Cost American Jobs, Shipping Them Overseas to China & India.

3. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Cause Electricity Bills to “Skyrocket.”

4. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Hurt Family Farmers & Rural America

5. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Not Improve the Environment

6. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Cause Gasoline and Diesel Prices to Spike Further.

7. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Be A Bureaucratic Nightmare.

8. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Send Billions of US Taxpayer Dollars Overseas.

9. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Raise Food Prices.

10. Speaker Pelosi’s National Energy Tax Will Set the Stage for Another Market Meltdown.

Click here for In depth explanations

Obama: Energy Prices Will Skyrocket

President Obama on his own cap and trade proposal - "energy prices will skyrocket"

Who needs details on a national energy tax?

The Myths of Cap and Trade

Speaker Pelosi and her fellow congressional Democrats are rushing towards a vote on their "cap and trade" proposal this week according to press reports.  If a vote is scheduled, there is little doubt that the bill will be brought up and rushed through before the July 4th district work period begins on Monday - limiting debate in an attempt to hide how disastrous cap and trade would be to our economy. 

Stay tuned to Bill's Blog as the debate on cap and trade, better known as the national energy tax, continues to intensify.  

In the meantime, for a quick refresh of what cap and trade means to our economy, read Congressman Shuster's recent editorial on the subject "A National Energy Tax is Not the Answer."

Map Shows True Cost of National Energy Tax on Electricity Prices - $636 Million in Increases for PA

Yesterday, the Capitol Hill newspaper The Hill published an article on the fight over the Democrats’ national energy tax in Congress. The article, posted below, referenced a map that shows how much electricity rates in states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia and would increase under “cap and trade.”

“The fact that this map shows electricity rates skyrocketing by $636 million in Pennsylvania isn’t surprising if you take a close look at what the Democrats are proposing,” Shuster said in response to the article. “This cap and trade proposal is aimed at killing America’s coal industry which would be devastating to our state’s economy.”

Coal lobby fights back on climate bill

By Jim Snyder

Posted: 06/18/09 06:15 PM [ET]

The coal industry is pushing back against a climate change bill that would likely curb coal use by circulating a map that shows which states would see their electric bills increase the most under the legislation.

But supporters of the bill say the industry’s figures are off the mark and don’t factor in ways the bill will offset rising energy costs or the jobs that it will create.

Lobbying has intensified with Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) pressing for a floor vote next week. Waxman reported progress on Thursday in talks with Democrats from rural states who have criticized the bill for not doing enough to protect consumers from higher energy costs.

Industry opponents of the bill are working to sow discontent within the Democratic caucus by estimating the cost impact by state, in hopes of drawing battle lines based on region rather than political party.

House Republicans have picked up on the theme and are circulating the coal industry’s map in hopes of blocking what is a top legislative priority of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and President Obama.

The National Mining Association, a trade group that represents coal producers, has claimed credit for the map, although an official at Peabody Energy, a large coal company, is listed in a pdf as its specific author.

According to the map, electricity prices in Texas could increase by more than $1 billion and in Pennsylvania by $636 million in 2012 and each subsequent year if the climate change bill becomes law.

Utilities in these states will not receive enough free allowances from the government to cover their emissions, leaving them to buy additional credits in a marketplace created by the bill, invest in projects that would offset their carbon pollution, find ways to conserve electricity, or switch to more climate friendly fuel sources.

Consumers in Washington, Oregon and California, in contrast, would see their electric bills decrease under the bill because utilities there emit less carbon dioxide and will likely have a surplus of allowances to sell in the marketplace.

The bill creates a transfer of wealth from states with high carbon emissions to those with lower levels, critics say.

Luke Popovich of the mining group said the map combines estimates from the Congressional Budget Office as to what the price of carbon will be in 2012 with emissions data from the Energy Information Administration, a division of the Energy Department.

“This is simply to say, ‘let’s be careful before we leap into the dark here,’” Popovich said.

Under the bill, utilities and other industrial sectors would have to obtain allowances to cover their carbon dioxide emissions. The majority of those allowances would be given away for free during an initial phase to help prevent dramatic cost increases. But some companies will likely have to buy additional allowances to cover their emissions.

The cost disparity comes because allowances are distributed both based on emissions and electric sales. So, a utility that relies on hydroelectric power and therefore has a relatively small amount of emissions to cover would likely have a surplus of allowances it could then sell to a utility that is short.

The coal industry’s map shows that states that rely on coal to get their power will see the electricity prices increase more than other areas like the West Coast and Northeast, areas that depend more on hydroelectric and nuclear power, neither of which emits carbon dioxide.

Coal now accounts for more than 50 percent of the electricity produced in the United States. But coal-fired power plants are the single largest source of carbon dioxide emissions from human activity. Legislation that caps carbon dioxide emissions is likely to make coal use less economical versus other fuel sources.

But a spokesman for one of the climate bill’s main authors, Energy and Commerce Energy and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey (D-Mass.), said the map grossly overstates the bill’s cost.

“Many other studies on a clean energy jobs plan, including the EPA study on Waxman-Markey, show that the cost increases would be vastly lower, and many other quality, transparently-created studies show energy savings and job increases,” said Eben Burnham-Snyder. “The positive results of those studies calls into question the validity of this map, especially given the fact that the authors appear to be those who oppose a clean energy plan.”

Burnham-Snyder said the map doesn’t take into account electricity savings generated by energy efficiency programs promoted by the bill.

Another map circulating on Capitol Hill shows far less of a cost impact in 2012, the first year of implementation

It shows that electric rates in Texas and Pennsylvania would increase only $3. Consumers in Washington and Oregon would see a savings, but only of $1, and electricity prices in California would increase by that amount. The map was developed by PG&E, a utility that is supportive of climate change legislation.

The Environmental Protection Agency, meanwhile, has estimated that the climate bill would cost consumers between $98 to $140 a year on average.

Other studies show a cap and trade program akin to what Congress is considering will be much costlier.

Study shows Cap and Trade is bad for the economy

Bolstering the argument Congressman Shuster made in his recent editorial, the Brookings Institution released a report titled "Consequences of Cap and Trade" that outlines how the national energy tax supported by Speaker Pelosi and President Obama would lower economic output, increase unemployment and make lighting, heating and cooling our homes and running our cars more expensive.

The report notes that Speaker Pelosi’s new national energy tax would:

• Reduce total personal consumption by 0.3 percent to 0.5 percent, or about $1 trillion to $2 trillion in from 2010 to 2050;
• Reduce the level of U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by around 2.5 percent relative to what it otherwise would have been in 2050;
• Reduce employment levels by 0.5 percent in the first 10 years alone.

The tax could cost American families up to $3,100 per year, will send countless American jobs overseas to China and India at a time when U.S. workers can afford it least, and place an enormous burden on everyone any time they flip on a light switch, drive a car, or when buy any product manufactured in the United States. At a time when gas prices have risen 41 days in a row, as today’s New York Times reports, do the Democrats really think now is a good time to be punishing the American people with higher taxes on energy?

House Republicans have a better solution: an “all of the above” energy strategy that will clean up the environment, create jobs in America, and lower energy prices – without raising taxes on a single American family or small business. Led by Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-IN), the GOP American Energy Solutions Group has outlined the cornerstones of the House Republican approach to energy:

• Increasing environmentally-safe energy production on remote lands and far off our shores;
• Promoting the use of alternative fuels that will reduce carbon emissions, such as nuclear, clean-coal, and renewable energy technologies; and
• Encouraging increased efficiencies and cutting edge technologies to maximize America’s energy potential.

A National Energy Tax is Not the Answer to our Problems

An editorial by Congressman Shuster:

Consumers are good at telling when a company is pulling a bait and switch. That same critical eye should be used when Congress tries to sell the American people an ambitious proposal like cap-and-trade. Sure it may look environmentally conscious, but cap-and-trade has buyer beware written all over it.

Cap-and-trade is a bait and switch. It won’t cut greenhouse gas emissions or make America stronger with “green jobs.” In reality, this plan would result in our unilateral economic disarmament by killing jobs at home and shipping them overseas. What cap-and-trade means for you is the imposition of a huge national energy tax that will charge you whenever you flip a light switch, buy food, take public transportation or fuel your car.

The average family in Pennsylvania will see a $3,100 jump in their annual electric bill through this national energy tax. Nationally electricity rates will jump 90 percent; gas prices will jump 74 percent; and natural gas by 55 percent. President Obama actually predicted this price spike last year when he said, “electricity rates would naturally skyrocket” under cap-and-trade. No wonder 77 percent of those polled in a recent ABC survey were concerned by what the Democrats’ national energy tax actually means for their families.

If this energy tax is put into effect, between 2010 and 2035 the gross domestic product of the United States will drop by $9 trillion. This means our economy will shrink and unemployment will soar. Close to a million jobs a year will be destroyed by the national energy tax and many of them will be lost in coal rich Pennsylvania.

President Obama and congressional Democrats know the national energy tax is a job killer. That’s why they spend so much time talking about how many “green jobs” their plan will create. However, for every green job created, others are wiped out. Look at Spain – a leader in Europe’s green economy. For every green job created in Spain 2.2 jobs are lost and only 1 in 10 of those green jobs ever becomes permanent. If green jobs are the answer like the Democrats say, why does Spain have one of Europe’s highest unemployment rates at over 17 percent?

I am deeply concerned with the well being of our environment, but we must be careful to make sensible decisions when it comes to massive regulatory changes to our economy. Passing a national energy tax like cap-and-trade would be disastrous for our economy, especially during a recession. Losing over a million jobs and forever altering the landscape of America is not the right decision for our future. Cap-and-trade is not the answer.

What Does $3,100 Mean to the Average Family?

How much will the Democrats’ national energy tax cost?

The Democrats’ national energy tax will confiscate approximately $3,100 per year from hard working families, kill jobs, and lead to more government intrusion.

What could the average family do with $3,100 a year?

• A driver could fill their car’s fuel tank more than 100 times.
• A family could pay for 15 months worth of disposable diapers.
• A young professional could pay for roughly 7 years of cell phone service.
• A Midwest wheat farmer or a Northeast dairy farmer could fill up their tractor’s fuel tank 33 times.
• A family of four could pay the grocery bill for 5 months.
• The average Illinois family could pay for more than 3 years of electricity bills.
• An energy-conscious consumer could buy 822 GE 13-watt energy efficient light bulbs.

Posted by: Press Secretary

Chairman doesn't know what is in his own energy tax bill

The video speaks for itself - the Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee admits that he doesn't know what is in the national energy tax bill:

Posted by: Press Secretary