Inhofe: Lieberman-Warner a regressive tax with no benefits
posted at 12:50 pm on June 3, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The Senate will vote this week on a bill that will raise energy prices, create a huge federal bureaucracy when we have too many as it is, and will lower carbon emissions over the next 25 years by half of what we’ve accomplished over the last six through free-market initiatives. Who would vote for such a monstrosity? Most of the Senate, if the debate vote gives any indication. Senator James Inhofe warns against the passage of the massive bill, pointing out that the bill hurts the poor and working class most of all:
With average gas prices across the country approaching $4 a gallon, it may be hard to believe, but the U.S. Senate is considering legislation this week that will further drive up the cost at the pump.
The Senate is debating a global warming bill that will create the largest expansion of the federal government since FDR’s New Deal, complete with a brand new, unelected bureaucracy. The Lieberman-Warner bill (America’s Climate Security Act) represents the largest tax increase in U.S. history and the biggest pork bill ever contemplated with trillions of dollars in giveaways. Well-heeled lobbyists are already plotting how to divide up the federal largesse. The handouts offered by the sponsors of this bill come straight from the pockets of families and workers in the form of lost jobs, higher gas, power and heating bills, and more expensive consumer goods.
Various analyses show that Lieberman-Warner would result in higher prices at the gas pump, between 41 cents and $1 per gallon by 2030. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says Lieberman-Warner would effectively raise taxes on Americans by more than $1 trillion over the next 10 years. The federal Energy Information Administration says the bill would result in a 9.5% drop in manufacturing output and higher energy costs.
Carbon caps will have an especially harmful impact on low-income Americans and those with fixed incomes. A recent CBO report found: “Most of the cost of meeting a cap on CO2 emissions would be borne by consumers, who would face persistently higher prices for products such as electricity and gasoline. Those price increases would be regressive in that poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than wealthier households.”
Any policy that drives up energy costs will have a disproportionate effect on lower-wage earners and those with fixed incomes. Energy prices affect prices of all goods brought to market, which erodes buying power through inflation. We saw this in the 1970s when Congress, as it does now, restricts domestic development of energy supplies and attempts to tax or regulate energy production.
As the cost of goods goup, the proportion of disposable income declines, which means that people wind up buying less. This proportional effect on disposable income increases for those earning less, who use a higher percentage of their wages for essentials. The squeeze results in a lower standard of living for those who can ill afford it, while remaining more or less a nuisance for those in the higher tax brackets.
Across the board, however, consumer confidence will drop and capital investment will dry up. The economy will start declining as prices rise in this manner as investors move to defensive postures. The economy will turn towards “stagflation”, that condition we saw thirty years ago that resulted from economic mismanagement but at the core was caused by energy shocks. And Lieberman-Warner promises a return to those policies.
What does it produce? A 1.4% reduction of CO2 in the overall atmosphere by 2050. We have lowered American emissions of CO2 by twice that in six years, thanks to the Bush administration’s efforts to use the free market to press for emissions improvements. In fact, we have outperformed Europe in that regard — and they’re using a system similar to Lieberman-Warner.
Why should we adopt failure in place of success? We’ll talk to Senator Inhofe today on the Ed Morrissey Show about this bill at 3 pm ET.
Update: Interview added:
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
And when the bill fails to carry out its “goals”, Congress will blame Bush for the high gas prices again.
amerpundit on June 3, 2008 at 12:55 PM
McCain/Lieberman ‘08!!!
Akzed on June 3, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Inhofe is one of a hand full of senators who get it. OK should be proud of him. Both my TX senators voted for this, sorry state of affairs.
L
letget on June 3, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Perfect, gas prices are way too high so Democrats want to raise the price even higher.
If they get these tax increases congress will have a big party spending all the money on every kind of nonsense. Even if you believe the global warming fraud is true, you should be against this bill because it just a tax increase so congress can go on yet another spending spree with your hard earned money.
Maxx on June 3, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Aimed right at ol Johnny Mac. If it passes it will only push the GOP base into more revolt. My party is suicidal.
Limerick on June 3, 2008 at 1:01 PM
Ed, I think you may have forgotten to mention that a certain maverick senator supports this bill.
Jeff_McAwesome on June 3, 2008 at 1:01 PM
There may be an issue of constitutionality. It’s discussed at Point of Law:
kimsch on June 3, 2008 at 1:07 PM
you mean McObama?
right4life on June 3, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Isn’t Lieberman-Warner essentially the same as Lieberman-McCain
MM’s site shows McCain didn’t vote on cloture last night. She says his actions on this bear watching, and I agree.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 1:10 PM
What I find disgusting about it is that businesses need to get permission to be allowed to do their business. That right there is bad, bad ,bad.
bbz123 on June 3, 2008 at 1:12 PM
Inhofe is one of the best we have.
Connie on June 3, 2008 at 1:12 PM
It’s good that Inhofe and other conservatives in Congress opine on the conservative web sites. I’ve often wondered why they don’t call a press conference and call out their colleagues for the traitorous bastards they are. Conservatives already know how bad the bill is. The message needs to go out to the general population that rely on the MSM for news. It’s well past time to start naming-names.
orlandocajun on June 3, 2008 at 1:16 PM
This is the Democrat version of a stimulus bill.
This only underscores the need for a fiscally conservative message. The Republicans are lost in the woods and lacking a united message.
moxie_neanderthal on June 3, 2008 at 1:19 PM
There are idiotic ideas, really idiotic ideas, and then this.
Chuck Schick on June 3, 2008 at 1:21 PM
This will do for emissions what the Department of Education has done for kids.
Squat.
drjohn on June 3, 2008 at 1:21 PM
Based on your opposition to taxing the wealthy, I thought you were a supply sider. Now you seem to be talking from the other side of the economic spectrum.
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:22 PM
It also transfers wealth from people/industries that politicians don’t like, to those they do. This is the kind of central planning and social engineering that only occurs in socialist/communist countries.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM
Isn’t most of this happening already? The same goes for your comments on stagflation. Our deficits are spiraling out of control, commodity prices are skyrocketing, and as the dollar declines millions of Chinese and Indians now have more purchasing power than Americans over basic goods that 5 years ago every American took foregranted.
The American way of life is under assault- according to sources as liberal as Barrons- and it takes a pending bill to alert your readers to this reality?
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM
Let me aim all of my various emissions at this proposed legislation.
James on June 3, 2008 at 1:23 PM
This sucks in so many ways. Of course I contacted my senators but I have ripped the republican so often for his RINO tactics that his office doesn’t even write back anymore. I must be on his “you lost this voter anyway so who gives a shit about the guy” list.
Bishop on June 3, 2008 at 1:24 PM
This bill is proof that global warming alarmism is not and has never been about the environment. It’s all about getting deeper and deeper into the average American’s pocket. That is the ONLY goal and that has been the ONLY goal from the beginning.
Maxx on June 3, 2008 at 1:26 PM
Wow. Wonder what it’s like to have a Republican senator.
Hope that cheered u up.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 1:26 PM
It’s absolutely dead this year. They can’t override a veto. So there’s eight months at least to do education on the issue. If that’s not enough time, then America is just too stupid to survive in any event.
RBMN on June 3, 2008 at 1:29 PM
Congress: Regulate this emission.
*fffttt*.
Rhinoboy on June 3, 2008 at 1:30 PM
We will have the President cheerleading for it relentlessly next year. With exec. and legislature behind it, will be as difficult to stop as the immigration bill was. And even then, they’ll keep trying and hiding it in other bills.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 1:33 PM
Do you remember how acid rain was threatening to destroy forests across the northeast? It’s funny how that problem disappeared almost overnight. The solution- let the market decide how those emissions will be reduced across industry.
This only underscores the need for a fiscally conservative message. The Republicans are lost in the woods and lacking a united message
The problem has been that the right has chosen to attack the science and the scientists. To a majority of Americans, that’s as effective as the right attacking stem cell research or evolution on the science. When asked to choose between the veracity of scientists vs. right wing bloggers on a complex scientific issue, the public will chose scientists every single time.
As a result, the right has missed its chance to frame the debate in a way that it can win. There’s really nothing to stop this bill now since all the Presidential nominees support it.
By the way, there is one small side benefit to this legislation: by increasing the total cost of burning fossil fuels, it will push the US away from foreign oil.
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Our state’s two Republican senators voted to let this garbage proceed. We cannot wait to flush Lamar Alexander down the toilet of life. We were asked to hold our noses and vote for Bob Corker and he has stabbed us in the back just like McCain will do if we hold our noses again.
volsense on June 3, 2008 at 1:37 PM
Ed you forgot thye most important part. As the prices go up and poor and middle class’s standard of living drops the calls for more socialism will increase. It will become a negative feedback loop as more socialism will increase the problems and the demand for more socialism will contiue to grow as gas becomes to expensive for people to go to work.
there is no other bill IMO that can lead to the complete and utter destruction of our country as we know it then this bill. this is a trojan horse for socialism and communism. the Senate should be ashamed of themselves for even thinking up this bill let alone voting for it.
I have called both my senators and I would plead for every one to do the same.
this bill is evil and utterly anti-capitalism
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Bring back Carter era economics !!! Bring back the Misery Index !!!
BowHuntingTexas on June 3, 2008 at 1:39 PM
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM
the attack on the science is justified because the entire Theory is bogus.
the republicans should have attacked pollution not Co2. they could have easily coopt the green movement and stopped the most wacky ideas (like CO2 crap) from gaining steam.
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Wow. Wonder what it’s like to have a Republican senator.
Hope that cheered u up.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 1:26 PM
In theory this would be a good thing, except that my Republican used to be a democrat and still does quite a bit of leaning to the left.
The only diff is the letter after his name and that letter doesn’t mean jack these days.
Bishop on June 3, 2008 at 1:43 PM
We need the old people to find out about this. They’ll fight it when they realize it might take away from the entitlement gravy train. If they’re going to tax the hell out of young workers to pay for something, it better by SS and Medicare! Those young workers are going to collapse or rebel or move to Australia eventually, and I’m sure the older voters would prefer it to be after they’ve gotten all they can out of entitlements rather than because of insanely expensive and useless environmental and energy initiatives that will only have an effect after they’re long dead. This is a direct threat to them and their interests. What do they care what they leave behind? They’ve already proven that they don’t care what kind of taxes and ruined economy they leave to their grandchildren. If older voters are willing to say to hell with their children and grandchildren and the U.S. economy, I’m sure they’ll say to hell with energy and environmental initiatives. Nothing matters after their life-span ends, right?
aero on June 3, 2008 at 1:44 PM
By the way, there is one small side benefit to this legislation: by increasing the total cost of burning fossil fuels, it will push the US away from foreign oil.
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Our economy needs CHEAP energy. A side benefit? you do understand what high energy will do to this economy right?
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 1:45 PM
Good, then let the public choose these scientist that put their reputations on the line saying global warming is fraud. These scientists out-number the IPCC scientists by a factor of more than twelve to one.
This is beside the fact that many of the IPCC scientist disagreed that global warming was either man made or a threat. But the political body of the UN’s IPCC that has everything to gain by this fraud, took all of the dissenting views out of the final reports.
So fine… lets believe the scientist. The debate is over, global warming is fraud.
Maxx on June 3, 2008 at 1:47 PM
Yeah, there is an advantage to cutting your own throat too, it keeps you from over eating.
Maxx on June 3, 2008 at 1:49 PM
By the way, there is one small side benefit to this legislation: by increasing the total cost of burning fossil fuels, it will push the US away from foreign oil.
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM
Cool, we can start using our own oi….er…umm…maybe not.
Bishop on June 3, 2008 at 1:55 PM
AP: Obama Effectively Clinches Nomination
amerpundit on June 3, 2008 at 1:57 PM
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
- Groucho
MB4 on June 3, 2008 at 1:57 PM
This is what the politicians need to understand. CO2 is NOT poison.
syncrodude on June 3, 2008 at 1:59 PM
TERM LIMITATION FOR CONGRESS NOW!
pilamaye on June 3, 2008 at 1:59 PM
TERM LIMITATION FOR CONGRESS NOW!
pilamaye on June 3, 2008 at 1:59 PM
I’m sure they will get right on that, just as soon as they vote to have their free perks and high salaries tied to job performance.
Bishop on June 3, 2008 at 2:02 PM
I can’t believe I thought Lieberman had half a brain.
A) He believes in false science
B) Promotes false science
C) Decides that if it can be used to tax the working schmucks of this nation, it’s useful.
This country has some really awful leadership when the likes of him is considered an independent.
Hening on June 3, 2008 at 2:09 PM
I seem to recall that was passed in an election only to be reversed by Congress. Funny how that worked.
Hening on June 3, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Our government is basically working against the best interests of the country. Of course they want to make it bigger.
Let’s see, what made America great - hard working, self-sufficient people, strong business, strong military, strong families.
Now look at the eggheads in DC, all the Dems and an increasing number of so-called Republicans do, create more dependants, punish corporations, weaken the military, marginalize the traditional family.
Great.
reaganaut on June 3, 2008 at 2:14 PM
What does Juan Hernandez have to say about this?
Valiant on June 3, 2008 at 2:14 PM
Pretty soon it will be time for the Pitch-Forks and Torches. The silent majority, when pushed too far, can get very loud in a hurry.
Lunkinator on June 3, 2008 at 2:15 PM
I can’t believe I thought Lieberman had half a brain.
A) He believes in false science
B) Promotes false science
C) Decides that if it can be used to tax the working schmucks of this nation, it’s useful.
This country has some really awful leadership when the likes of him is considered an independent.
Hening on June 3, 2008 at 2:09 PM
Lieberman has half a brain.
The other half is McCain’s.
TexasJew on June 3, 2008 at 2:17 PM
The market alone is pushing the transportation industries to become more efficient. The stupid legislations on which types of fuels may and may not be sold need to be repealed rather than passing MORE legislation. These guys are insidious. These are the same assholes who pushed our refineries into mothballs and closed our wells from drills and pumps.
This won’t push the US away from foreign oil.
It only pushes the price up;
nothing good will come of allowing this.
PLEASE LET THIS BE THE STRAW THAT BREAKS THE CONGRESS’ BACK!
Constitution: now you see it, now you don’t.
That the Senate hasn’t the right to instigate such a bill is interesting–much ado about absolutely nothing? Or do we have yet another example of one portion of government assuming another’s roll as if it is their own–and why? Because the wanted it, and because they could push it over on us out of sheer willpower and MSM promotion.
There is no true logic excusing this tax.
Whoever is in office, time to vote them out if they can’t tell the difference between up and down.
maverick muse on June 3, 2008 at 2:20 PM
When asked to choose between the veracity of scientists vs. right wing bloggers on a complex scientific issue, the public will chose scientists every single time.
bayam on June 3, 2008 at 1:34 PM
I’m a scientist and these Global Warming lunatics are just grant whores and shakedown artists.
Science takes a back seat to their pathetic need to grab public money. Scientists? - “Pimps” is a better word for them..
TexasJew on June 3, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Maxx, thanks for straightening out bayam. His unsubstantiated claim was just a leftwing talking point without any credible information presented other than his personal opinion. Of course, personal opinions are all a lib needs to substantiate the truth.
volsense on June 3, 2008 at 2:23 PM
We can push the Republican national delegates to put Inhofe on the ticket.
Buddahpundit on June 3, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Does this paragraph from Atlas Shrugged sound familiar?
Because of the government’s socialist policies, the collapse of the
U. S. economy is imminent. Francisco d’Anconia destroys his holdings
and disappears because his properties worldwide are about to be
nationalized. He leaves the “looters”—the parasites who feed off the
producers—nothing, wiping out millions of dollars belonging to
corrupt American investors like James Taggart. Meanwhile,
politicians use their economic power to create their own personal
empires. In one such scheme, the Taggart freight cars needed to haul
the Minnesota wheat harvest to market are diverted to a project run
by the relatives of powerful politicians. The wheat rots at the
Taggart stations, the farmers riot, farms shut down (as do many of
the companies providing them with equipment), people lose their
jobs, and severe food shortages result.
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 2:25 PM
We’ve created our own little Kyoto Treaty!
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 2:27 PM
What science? More like wishful thinking based on a crap computer model and crap data. That, even after having been proven wrong is still worshiped by libtards who refuse to “change direction” based on new data. If it was science cranks like Hansen would have changed their positions based on the new data rather than revise their crap data to continue to support their ideology.
Al Gore is a scientist just like I’m Hugh Hefner’s love child.
jdkchem on June 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Wow, you don’t think that this is part of the appeal for the lefties? It will destroy the economy, but hey, we’ll be using less oil!
melda on June 3, 2008 at 2:42 PM
No that is based on the assumption that the CO2 outputs will remain fairly constant and does not take into account the HUGE increases China and India have in CO2 outputs. That is the whole problem with all these cutting measures because the will do nothing in the world picture when we have China and India blowing all these models and projections out of the water.
JeffinSac on June 3, 2008 at 2:43 PM
This is just another economic stimulus package…for China.
LevStrauss on June 3, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Global warming alarmism has become a bigger danger to our economic freedom than any foreign threat.
petefrt on June 3, 2008 at 2:43 PM
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 2:25 PM
I just started Atlas Shrugged again last night, and it’s like A.R. was a prophet. Scary!
melda on June 3, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Like it or not we are going to end up paving the planet anyway. We might as well get on with it.
(just got on the Kyoto Most Wanted list)
Limerick on June 3, 2008 at 2:47 PM
melda on June 3, 2008 at 2:44 PM
We need to start taking our country back!
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 2:48 PM
Why did McCain, as chief author of the original inception of this piece of feces take his name off of it????
Oh, yeah, too busy campaigning. Makes sense to turn it over to one of the other pseudo-Republicans.
And here I thought he had the courage to never abandon those things he really believes in, despite wanting votes from us peons and peasants.
For the first time in my life I see that a majority of politicians are actually trying to destroy the American economy; Not doing it out of ignorance as usual, but with full knowledge that it will devastate the economy and the lower and middle classes of the country.
For the last 30 years, I have usually read Atlas Shrugs about this time of year, every year. No need to read it this year: I get to watch it play out in real time.
FOOLS
LegendHasIt on June 3, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Global warming alarmism has become a bigger danger to our economic freedom than any foreign threat.
This IS a foreign threat: see “U.N., world government, thugs influencing world policy, libs, communism, downfall of United States.” Encyclopedia Brittanica, fourth edition.
Bishop on June 3, 2008 at 2:53 PM
I hate to sound like Chicken Little but, this will literally be the end of the US as we know it. We will slip one more rung into the socialist abyss and then the rest of the way when BHO gets into office!
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 2:56 PM
This goes beyond liberals passing foolish legislaiton while remaining ignorant of the negative outcomes.
They really are trying to hurt America. They know it and they love it.
Grafted on June 3, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I am afraid it is time to stockpile weapons and ammunition. Our government appears fixated on destroying the greatest democracy in the world. The founding fathers provided us with the Second Amendment should it ever be necessary. Can someone explain how it is not necessary?
trs on June 3, 2008 at 2:58 PM
I’d like to see the CEO’s of our biggest industries stand up and say they will decamp to China, India, or anywhere other than the US if this were to pass. If I were them I’d let all my employees know their jobs are in jeopardy if the bill passed and that they better call their Sens and Reps to kill it or risk losing their jobs. Time for some blunt honesty.
DerKrieger on June 3, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Vaclav Klaus for Prez!!
Lunkinator on June 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Not chicken little. The entire US stock market agrees with you. Oil price is already at work killing our economy and what do our “leaders” do about the crisis? Why they debate a bill that would increase the price more. When can we get the tar and feathers out?
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM
DerKrieger on June 3, 2008 at 3:01 PM
agreed. with this foolishness and the immigration nonsense it is becoming very clear that our leaders are clueless and do not have the best interest of the citizens of the USA at heart. They need to stop being world diplomats and concentrate on running America. Enough.
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 3:07 PM
I just freakin give up. Nobody up on capitol hill has a clue. If I have said it once I have said it a thousand times, throw out all the incumbents, repeat until we have folks up there that are responsive to the people and have some semblance of common sense instead of all this lawyer mentality that is so pervavise in our lawmakers.
It seems like everytime we get our knickers in an uproar over the latest piece of legislation, that anybody who gives it a cursory glance, knows is a fraud, the more determined they are to show us they know what is best for us and just go on their merry way. Some of them know they won’t be back and I think they are just doing this crap out of spite. Kind of a “well I got the last word” moment that we will wind up paying for, for the next decade.
Whether it is immigration, health insurance, enviroment, energy, or national security they just seem bent on doing whatever they want while loading up all these bills with as much pork as they can.
There is no telling how much more damage these senile codgers can do before the November elections, which would be the soonest we can get rid of them.
Oh wait that’s right, everybodies congress critter is a good guy, it is the other congress person that is despicable.
Just A Grunt on June 3, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Hmmm.. Australia.
Not a bad idea.
SaintOlaf on June 3, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Just A Grunt on June 3, 2008 at 3:22 PM
throw the bums out. I have had enough.
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 3:25 PM
MCCAIN ‘08: HE’S NOT JUST AGAINST OBSCENE PROFITS, HE’S AGAINST PROFITS.
misterpeasea on June 3, 2008 at 3:38 PM
The problem with “throwing the bums out” is that everyone thinks there own bum isnt that bad, so ALL the bums return. We have to each, throw our own bum out. Replacing him/her with a normal human who has not been poisoned by the gases emanating from D.C.
Lunkinator on June 3, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Would love to email this thread to McConnell as a warning, and to Jim Demint as a sign of support.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Lunkinator on June 3, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Well I know my bums are bums. The problem is like the Soviet union I have no choice. the parties sees that there are no primary races etc. The deck is stacked against the free will of the people. I really think Jefferson was right. we tried the ballot box in 1994 that worked for about 2 years then it didn’t. The thing back in 1776 worked for about 220 years. I would say the second option has the better track record.
unseen on June 3, 2008 at 3:49 PM
While we’re at it, lets move the capital. D.C. is a festering sinkhole. A place like Wichita, KS might do, geographically at least. Or maybe Nome, AK if we want to keep them from getting too big for their britches.
JiangxiDad on June 3, 2008 at 3:59 PM
If we don’t act now to help stop the mythical disaster that is Global Warming/Climate Change it may theoretically be too late!
saltydogg14 on June 3, 2008 at 4:06 PM
It’s going to take a new party. Something like the Lawyer-Free Party, or the Government Butt Out Party. Maybe the Part Time Temporary Volunteer Legislators Party. Something with bipartisan appeal, to put a stake in both the parties we have now.
NellE on June 3, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Why doesn’t the 30K plus of science types saying this whole thing is BS get any play? I qualify in this area also and it is total and complete BS. Yes, we should reduce the use of limited quantity resources and increase the use of renewable resources but tying this to a small amount of CO2 is stupid.
duff65 on June 3, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Thank you Gorical!
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 4:24 PM
What’s funny is by their standards of lowering CO2 they will sends us back to an ice age. CO2 is our heating blanket it keeps us warm!
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 4:26 PM
I don’t know if you guys read Big Lizards , but he has an interesting post up on this very subject. The following is an excerpt:
But this bill is only a pale shadow of what we will have if Barack H. Obama is elected; no piker he, Obama has proposed, as part of his own energy policy, a scheme to reduce carbon emissions by 80% over the next 41 years. This would not just cripple the economy; achieving such a cut in so little time would require us to paraplegicize our economy. (I don’t care if there’s no such word; there ought to be.) As Sen. O. puts it on his campaign web site:
Well, I don’t believe that climate change is just an issue that’s convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it’s one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation.
(I wondered whether Obama considers Islamic terrorism another of the “greatest moral challenges” of our generation; but I can’t tell, because, so far as I can tell, he doesn’t actually mention terrorism or al-Qaeda on his website. But there’s no search function either, so I can’t be certain.)
Welcome to Obamanomics: You may think that you don’t want to go back to the 1940s level of energy use, but that’s just pesky, old false consciousness again. Just ask Barack; he’ll tell you what to think. (If you don’t understand what I mean, please buy and read Jonah Goldberg’s tour de force, Liberal Fascism.)
But the Democrats have discovered, to their shock and anguish, that voters might actually be more concerned about their own bank accounts than the American carbon footprint. Not only that, but Republican senators and President Bush are not the irrelevancies that Democrats, in their hubris, imagine them. For now it appears nearly certain that this bill is D.O.A…. at least for this session:
With gasoline at $4 per gallon and home heating and cooling costs soaring, it is getting harder to sell a bill that would transform the country’s energy industries and - as critics will argue - cause energy prices to rise even more….
The debate on global warming is viewed as a watershed in climate change politics. Yet both sides acknowledge the prospects for passage are slim this election year.
Several GOP senators are promising a filibuster; the bill’s supporters are expressing doubt they can find the 60 votes to overcome the delaying tactic. [Not to mention having to find 67 votes to override a promised presidential veto.]
Terrye on June 3, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Perhaps something as simple as the resurrection of the original Anti-Federalist Party, which advocated for States’ rights and individual freedoms above the power of the federal government at the time of the framing of the Constitution.
aero on June 3, 2008 at 4:30 PM
I sense that you all are frustrated at your or other peoples senators. Well your frustration is insignificant compared to mine. I and my fellow Oklahomans did our jobs and our senators are Inhoff and Coburn. Now we have to sit here and wait for all you lazy sods to get yours replaced or straightened out. Do you know how frustrating that is for us when we can’t do anything about your problem?
Next: aero - where did you get all the hate for your elders? You will be there someday. I involuntarily paid almost $600K present value into the system. At 5% CD rate, I would be making $3K/mo until I die and my heirs and assignees would have the $600K. Of the remainder of my precedent family of 3 people, they collected 2 years ss in-toto. So - GET OFF OUR BACKS you ignorant idiot.
Old Country Boy on June 3, 2008 at 4:30 PM
I predict that if this bill (or one like it) is ever signed into law, it will mean the end of Western Civilization. The trillions of dollars that it will cost will have the same effect on the U.S.A. that the war in Afghanistan and Reagan’s military buildup and Strategic Defense Initiative had on the Soviet Union. It will bring about the total and utter collapse of the U.S. economy — with the rest of the world’s economies falling like dominoes in its wake.
My collie says:
Indeed, the four horseman of the apocalypse loom large on the horizon.
Just thought that I’d cheer everyone up a bit — that’s all.
CyberCipher on June 3, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Bingo … the goal isn’t to reduce carbon dioxide, it’s to cripple the US, foment discontent and hate, usher in new ways to control me and you and ultimately take the US off the world stage.
This crap has been in the works for years. The public will be more easily stripped of their money and liberties if they feel it will help the environment. This “climate change” needs to be buried and every group associated with it dissolved.
If we let them have their way with this spurious “climate change”, the only ones that will suffer are the poor and middle class. Eventually they’ll expand their control to every aspect of our lives to “save the environment”, including controlling food.
This is a disaster for us, a hope for them.
darwin on June 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Terrye on June 3, 2008 at 4:29 PM
If we cut CO2 by 80% we WILL go into an ice age. CO2 is what keeps the planet warm. During the dinosaur period we had higher levels of CO2 because of volcanic activity which made the planet a plethora of plant life which kept the dinosaurs well fed. When they ceased to exist and we went through a climate change again we went into an ice age again because of low CO2 levels. The whole northern hemisphere which we live on was and ebb and flow of ice which is now our north pole. It will continue this process after we’re long gone we just don’t know when. But, if we cut the CO2 output by 80% we will be in a frozen tundra again!
xler8bmw on June 3, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Hey, good idea, gas is at $4 per gallon and crippling our economy, airlines are raising rates, let’s pass a bill to raise the gas even more…and when winter comes along we can really stick it to the people who need heat. What are they going to do, freeze to death?…HAHAHAHAHAHA! get it, put a freeze on emissions, so we can freeze the people…I love bureaucrat humor
ummmmm, could you lower the temp in the budget office? It’s a little warm in here. Thanks, lets make sure they have plenty of heating oil for congress for winter, we don’t want them cold…oh yeah, and a special assessment for congress to cover the increase in travel expenses. There, congress is taken care of, that’s what’s important.
*
Tell congress they have to pay for the heating of their building out of their pocket, gas for their cars out of their own pocket, money out of their pocket to cover increase fuel travel costs in a plane, and watch the price come tumbling down.
We would have 3 refineries in three years, and f*ckk the elk and moose, we are drilling to keep congress warm.
right2bright on June 3, 2008 at 4:39 PM
Democrats and this congress are literally at war against the american people. There is really no other way to look at this. They are coming after everything we’ve got,, from our property, our income, our savings, our children, the food we eat,,, even going to a public bathroom is now political with gender neutral laws in Maryland and Colorado. Will there ever be enough that we can give that will ever, ever satisfy them?
Half the world yearns for the freedom and liberty that this congress of 535 people seems intent on destroying!
535 people are accomplishing what nations, empires and army’s could not. The total collapse and destruction of the United States.
JellyToast on June 3, 2008 at 4:40 PM
It was meant as deep sarcasm, and as a note that none of these new massive spending initiatives really matter once current entitlements are granted to the Baby Boomers in large numbers. As a person who will be forced to pay in a similarly gigantic amount of money to what you stated over the course of my working life, but who will never see a dime of it back, I harbor a great deal of bitterness toward the elders who are unwilling to acknowledge that their retirement and medical costs will consume 100% of the federal budget in just a few years and do something about it. That’s right — one hundred percent of the entire federal budget. It can only be sustained through massive MASSIVE tax increases on the younger workers and a cessation of pretty much all discretionary spending within my lifetime.
It’s not hatred of my elders. It’s hatred of those who know exactly what’s coming our way and won’t do anything about it - our representatives in government, many members of the media, and yes the AARP and other elder advocacy organizations that seem to feel it’s perfectly fine to bleed the younger generations absolutely dry for the sake of their own comfort in retirement. You paid in, but not as much as I will pay in. You got few benefits, but not as few as I will get.
Yes, I will be there one day. And there will be no safety net for me. I will also have little or no savings for myself because I’ll likely be paying over 50% of my income to support the generation before me in their old age. It’s not hatred of my elders, it’s a hatred of short-sightedness and socialism in general. Please don’t take it as a personal insult to you. If I could have all the SS and Medicare tax I’ve paid in and will pay in back, I’d be able to save for my own retirement and support my aging parents to boot. I’d even have some left over to donate to charities that help out with seniors who don’t have gainfully employed kids to support them. What we have is a freaking Ponzi scheme, and that’s what I hate. My age group is at the bottom of the pyramid, in the Get-Screwed-Royally spot.
Again, no offense intended to any individual older person who has faithfully paid into the system their entire life and rightfully expects something back for it. Just a request to consider where it leaves the American economy in the future when the entitlement programs have swallowed the U.S. economy whole and left an empty shell for your grandkids.
aero on June 3, 2008 at 4:45 PM
The end of America. :(
ThePrez on June 3, 2008 at 4:47 PM
Wow. The taxes on GALLON OF GAS IS ABOUT 200% of what the oil companys profit. And now we have congres asking the people who supply us with gasoline WHY DO YOU FOLKS EARN SO MUCH MONEY. No one wants to say that while BIG OIL makes 650 billion the government taxes paid for gasoline is 1.3 trillion dollars. Wake up people the two biggest cost for a gallon of gasoline the cost of crude and taxes. If I am wrong then tell me why if gasoline cost 310 in the U.S. that same gallon cost 756 in London England.
TomLawler on June 3, 2008 at 4:52 PM
You want to know who is behind this?
That’s exactly what they want.
People need to understand that the Marxists still want to fulfill the words that Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev said while addressing Western ambassadors at a reception at the Polish embassy in Moscow on November 18, 1956.
Unfortunately, the Cold War is not over. Putin is bringing ib back full force, as are the Chinese. Since the 1848 Communist Manifesto, the Communists have been trying to turn the USA into a Socialist country. They made a lot of strides in the 20th century. They are still at war with us, from both within and without.
Wake up, Neo…
Red Pill on June 3, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Also, Old Country Boy, if you think I have hatred and bitterness toward my elders, just wait for the generation warfare that’s coming when people my age find that they are unable to put our kids through college, get health care, or retire ourselves due to incredibly high tax rates imposed on us and see what happens then.
I repeat - once entitlements kick in for the Boomers, there won’t be anything left to pay for anything else. Entitlements will constitute our entire economy, which cannot survive the retirement of the Baby Boomers without horrifying consequences.
aero on June 3, 2008 at 4:53 PM
Time for me to start planning that move to the Carribean, open up boating service.
ThePrez on June 3, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Meanwhile, the good ol boys in congress keep gettin richer and richer.
JellyToast on June 3, 2008 at 5:02 PM
This line could lead every story about what Congress does these days.
labrat on June 3, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »