GOP leadership: Carbon taxes are not up for negotiation

posted at 7:21 pm on July 16, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Earlier today, certain Congressional Democrats let it be known that their party would be ready and willing to take the country over the coming fiscal cliff if Republicans don’t agree to President Obama’s proposal to hike taxes on the country’s wealthiest earners (but remember: Republicans are ones refusing to cooperate and causing all of this dat gum partisan gridlock!).

A top Senate Democrat bluntly warned Monday that her party is prepared to let all the Bush-era tax cuts expire and automatic spending cuts to defense and domestic programs take place at the beginning of next year unless Republicans agree to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

“If Republicans won’t work with us on a balanced approach, we are not going to get a deal,” said Sen. Patty Murray from Washington, the fourth-ranking Senate Democrat.

Together, the expiring tax hikes and mandatory spending cuts, the so-called “fiscal cliff,” could hurt the economy if Congress does not work out a compromise to lessen their impact.

Well, fine then: If that’s the way it’s gonna’ be, two can play at that game. The well-circulated idea of a tax on carbon emissions as an ostensible method of reducing both global warming and the deficit is an idea long held dear by the Left, and looks like it might be getting some renewed attention in the coming deficit battle. Thankfully, the GOP leadership is once again nipping that travesty of an economic imposition in the bud:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), speaking through aides, have stated their opposition to the concept in recent days.

Boehner spokesman Michael Steel had a one-word answer when asked, on Friday, whether the Speaker would ever consider a carbon tax to help address climate change and the deficit: “No.”

Similarly, McConnell spokesman John Ashbrook said Monday that “Leader McConnell opposes a national energy tax.”

While their positions are no surprise, the categorical opposition underscores the hurdles facing an ad hoc, left-right coalition of activists and policy wonks who have held a series of meetings in private to discuss the idea.

And a darn good thing, too. If there’s anything America doesn’t need right now, it’s any more regulatory barriers to energy development, or taxes discouraging said energy development while simultaneously causing energy prices to ‘necessarily skyrocket.’ A carbon tax would be a terrible idea at the best of times, let alone the worst of times, and if we would just stop with the ridiculous self-limitations limiting the entrepreneurial might of our own energy sector and start taking advantage of our own abundant resources in the burgeoning world market, it would be a huge boon in lifting ourselves out of recession. A carbon tax in any form is just plain counterproductive:

However, watching states loot “dedicated” eco-taxes for general revenue, seeing the emergence of more proposals for revenue-raising carbon taxes to finance continued deficit spending, and generally bearing witness to endless insincerity on the part of greens and their allies, I have to admit that my friends in the free-market movement were right: A carbon tax would simply become another general revenue raiser and a step in carbon-seduction. “Oh, come on, you’ve already accepted the tax, now let’s do cap-and-trade and regulation.” …

There would be virtually no environmental benefits to unilateral greenhouse gas emission reductions by developed countries (whose GHG levels are already flat and slowly declining), while developing countries are pouring out virtually every kind of pollutant with joyous abandon. Some argue that we’ll get “co-benefits” from reducing other pollutants, such as particulates. Well, we already have highly effective (if economically damaging) regulations for conventional pollutants. If they’re not working, they should be fixed. Establishing a new set of controls based on ancillary benefits is not simply wasteful, it’s dishonest. …

High energy costs reduce economic productivity and are passed along to consumers in everything they buy, from medical treatments to food and clothing. In fact, research at the American Enterprise Institute suggests that half of the total spending consumers do on energy is invisible to them: Its costs are embedded in the things they buy and the services they use. The more things cost, the less people consume, which means less production, less economic growth, and fewer jobs. …


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Good. Even in a nation chock full of stupid laws, regulations and taxes, a carbon tax would be one of the dumbest.

Bishop on July 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Its,…..

*********************** DOA *******************************!!

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 7:27 PM

all of this dat gum

What? I think you mean “dadgum.”

rcpjr on July 16, 2012 at 7:27 PM

It’s all part of their slippery slope evil agenda to pass a universal fart tax. Each methane release is like a small slap in Gaia’s sacred feminine face.

abobo on July 16, 2012 at 7:28 PM

These people would tax stone arrowheads and spearheads if that’s where the volume of commercial activity was.

RBMN on July 16, 2012 at 7:30 PM

an ad hoc, left-right coalition of activists and policy wonks who have held a series of meetings in private to discuss the idea.

One or two squishy “rights” do not a “left/right” coalition make.

squint on July 16, 2012 at 7:32 PM

There would be virtually no environmental benefits to unilateral greenhouse gas emission reductions by developed countries (whose GHG levels are already flat and slowly declining), while developing countries are pouring out virtually every kind of pollutant with joyous abandon

The harder we make it to produce energy here, the more polution will happen abroad.

Count to 10 on July 16, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Obowma can tax anything he wants to…

… Judge Roberts said so.

Seven Percent Solution on July 16, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Pssssst,….the DemoRats and ProgTards want to convert
Up an top,to DownUnder……..

Exhibit “A”!

Australia’s Lower House Passes Carbon Tax Bill
**********************************************

Australia’s lower house of parliament has passed a contentious new law on carbon emissions tax, ending years of heated debate.
Lawmakers passed a packet of measures Wednesday that will impose a levy on the country’s biggest polluters starting July 1 of next year.

Polluters will be paying a fixed price of about $23 per ton of greenhouse gasses
********************

during the first year and a carbon-trading system will follow.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s Clean Energy Bill is fiercely opposed by the opposition
*************************

which argues that the carbon tax will cut jobs and increase the cost of living without reducing pollution.

Australia is one of the world’s worst polluters and a major exporter of coal. It currently relies on coal to generate about 80 percent of its electricity.

The government has long worked on ways to reduce carbon emissions, but all previous bills have been defeated.

Thousands in Australia have protested the plan
***********************************************

that caused Ms. Gillard’s approval ratings to drop to the lowest level
******

for any prime minister in 17 years.

The tax is aimed at reducing carbon emissions, which are blamed for global warming, to 95 percent of 2000 levels by the year 2020.

The European Union and New Zealand already have emission trading schemes and

smaller regional plans are in place in Japan and
**********************

the United States.
******************
http://blogs.voanews.com/breaking-news/2011/10/11/australias-lower-house-passes-carbon-tax-bill/

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Let it crash! And the Democrats can take the credit!

GarandFan on July 16, 2012 at 7:35 PM

It’s all part of their slippery slope evil agenda to pass a universal fart tax. Each methane release is like a small slap in Gaia’s sacred feminine face.

abobo on July 16, 2012 at 7:28 PM


///////////////////////
// ALERT! ALERT! //
///////////////////////

MONITORS AND KEYBOARDS IN DIRE JEOPARDY!

MASSIVE BEVERAGE SPEW POSSIBLE!

///////////////////////
// ALERT! ALERT! //
///////////////////////

The War Planner on July 16, 2012 at 7:35 PM

A carbon tax in any form is just plain counterproductive:

Only if you assume one is trying to acheive a vibrant growing economy. It’s very productive if you seek to punish and disincentivize wealth and success. And let’s face it, wealth and success are a real affront to the non wealthy and unsuccessful.

trubble on July 16, 2012 at 7:36 PM

There was an article that, of all people, George Shultz, Reagan’s Sec of State, supports a carbon tax! And thinking of some candidates like Huntsman, even Romney before he reformed because of the new evidence, that still support the “science” of global warming that the leftists trumped up (the hockey stick graph was a fabrication of the Berkeley grad Michael Mann; without the h stick, the conclusion is that there is nothing unusual about current temperatures, and so… there is nothing wrong with the climate! And, arguably, CO2 has nothing at all to do with climate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg).

George Shultz is 91 years old. The old guard, and some candidates who have been running for office for so long and so hard that they haven’t even stopped to talk to their constituents in years, have missed the boat. Republicans don’t believe anymore in the leftist perpetrated global warming fantasy, or fraud. Republicans don’t believe in restricting energy use for climate change, even if some tax revenue is generated. Energy is the lifeblood of society.

anotherJoe on July 16, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Obowma can tax anything he wants to…

… Judge Roberts said so.

Seven Percent Solution on July 16, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Seven Percent Solution:You Sir,are Correct:)
============================================

Democrats seek leverage as fiscal cliff looms
— Jul. 16 7:30 PM EDT
*********************

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats are going all-in in a fiscal game of chicken,
********

saying they’ll let everyone’s income taxes rise on Jan. 1 and slash defense spending
**********************

amid 8-plus percent unemployment

if Republicans continue to balk at raising taxes just on those making more than $250,000 a year.

The brave face is being adopted as President Barack Obama and Congress come to grips with the possibility that gridlock and stalemate

will result in the government careening off a fiscal cliff
***********************************************************

in January with automatic tax increases, spending cuts and an approaching exhaustion of borrowing ability.

“If we can’t get a good deal, a balanced deal that calls on the wealthy to pay their fair share,

then I will absolutely continue this debate into 2013

rather than lock in a long-term deal this year that throws middle-class families under the bus,” Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said in a speech Monday.

Murray’s salvo was the latest in an almost daily back-and-forth between top Republicans and Democrats

over the one-two punch facing the economy in January:

expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the imposition of $110

billion in automatic spending cuts, half coming from defense.
(More..)
==========

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/democrats-willing-risk-tax-hike-all

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 7:40 PM

abobo on July 16, 2012 at 7:28 PM

///////////////////////
// ALERT! ALERT! //
///////////////////////

MONITORS AND KEYBOARDS IN DIRE JEOPARDY!

MASSIVE BEVERAGE SPEW POSSIBLE!

///////////////////////
// ALERT! ALERT! //
///////////////////////

The War Planner on July 16, 2012 at 7:35 PM

The War Planner:

Dear Gawd,will you please sound the AlARM/SIREN next time,

and,LOL:)

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 7:43 PM

NUTS!

LeftCoastRight on July 16, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Erika;
From your post:

as an ostensible method of reducing both global warming is an idea long held dear by the Left,

I think you left out 1/2 of your “both,” or the “both” doesn’t belong.

Sorry for the grammar quibble…

massrighty on July 16, 2012 at 7:46 PM

For you Hot Gasser’s/GassEttes,in Harms Way,
Weather warning!
_________________

Severe T-storms for extreme SE Montana, SW North Dakota & NW South Dakota thru 10pm MDT bringing 70 mph gusts & 2.5″ hail – @breakingweather

@JimCantore tweeted:

JimCantore
Tornado warned storm heading towards Cameron, AZ. Decent rotation.

Submitted 46 mins ago from twitter.com by editor

Today’s Storm Reports (1200 UTC – 1159 UTC)
http://www.spc.noaa.gov/climo/reports/today.html

canopfor on July 16, 2012 at 7:47 PM

One or two squishy “rights” do not a “left/right” coalition make.

squint on July 16, 2012 at 7:32 PM

That’s the name of the game with the LSM. 1-2 Northeastern RINOS sign on to a socialist bill and the LSM trumpets it as “BIPARTISAN!”

A healthcare tax mandate gets passed without a SINGLE Republican vote and the LSM trumpets it as having “OVERWEALMING!” support.

The Attorney General gets held in CRIMINAL contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with subpoenas and 6 democrats vote with the Republicans and the LSM screams “PARTISAN RAAAAAACISTS!”

wildcat72 on July 16, 2012 at 7:50 PM

It always makes me grind my teeth to hear a Democrat talk about a “balanced plan”. That’s because it always means:

1. Raise taxes now.
2. Promise to reduce spending later (but never actually do so).

Steven Den Beste on July 16, 2012 at 7:51 PM

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), speaking through aides, have stated their opposition to the concept in recent days.

…OH OH!…F & F!…(no not Fast & Furious)…FRICK & FRACK are in charge!…someone is smiling…and it ain’t our side!

KOOLAID2 on July 16, 2012 at 7:57 PM

It always makes me grind my teeth to hear a Democrat talk about a “balanced plan”. That’s because it always means:

1. Raise taxes now.
2. Promise to reduce spending later (but never actually do so).

Steven Den Beste on July 16, 2012 at 7:51 PM

And yet the GOP falls for it EVERY TIME.

The only scenario I can see where raising taxes should be on the table in balancing the budget would be:

1. Spending cuts and entitlement reform FIRST.
2. If those targets are stuck to consider taxes ONLY if that fails to close the gap, but it would be mandated that $2 more be cut in spending IMMEDIATELY for every dollar projected to be raised in taxes.

wildcat72 on July 16, 2012 at 7:59 PM

The private sector economy has been down on the canvas for years. Obama just keeps kicking it, while screaming “Get Up!!”

jaime on July 16, 2012 at 8:12 PM

A top Senate Democrat bluntly warned Monday that her party is prepared to let all the Bush-era tax cuts expire and automatic spending cuts to defense and domestic programs take place at the beginning of next year

Let them do it. Then when it does happen, Crucify the Democrat with it. Make them own the increase in taxes.

SWalker on July 16, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Hey today the man caused global warming was thrown over the cliff, by the IPCC, if anyone cares. I guess they gave up on Al Gore’s missing warm swaddling blanket that all computer models need to make their dream come true.

Well tough, it’s still missing, so stick that in your computer model.

tarpon on July 16, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Let them do it. Then when it does happen, Crucify the Democrat with it. Make them own the increase in taxes.

SWalker on July 16, 2012 at 8:12 PM

I totally agree. The economic damage of Taxmageddon is unavoidable now even if Congress extended ALL tax rates and Obama signed it, because the effect of Taxmageddon has already been planned for in the coming quarter.

Better to make the Democrats own it and fix it in January after the new Congress and President are in than go for some lame half-ass deal that will allow Obama to claim “victory”.

What I am frustrated by is the Republicans, including Romney are ONLY defending Obama’s stance against renewing the tax rates for the so-called “rich” when his plan, AS STATED RAISES TAXES ON EVERYONE starting in 2014! Obama isn’t going to make ANY of the current tax rates permanent. He plans for them to go up ON EVERYONE!

wildcat72 on July 16, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Here’s a novel idea: Stop The Spending.

And if we reduced the size of government we wouldn’t need so many taxes.

The fun thing is if you go over the economic cliff you get both because there is nothing left of the country to tax or spend anything on.

ajacksonian on July 16, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Boner and McConnel say no? Why do I feel a grand compromise screwing coming? I am so mad lately with the nonstop coordinated lying by the libs and msm (but I repeat myself). Trying to hope Romney is waiting until fall to let loose, but the one-sidedness of the spin is infuriating. Stop asking the honorless to be honorable, wind up, and nut punch the JEF.

Huckabye-Romney on July 16, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Let’s call the carbon tax by it’s real names-The let’s send all remaining American manufacturing to China tax, or The let’s double energy costs for the Poor and Middle Class tax.
We don’t have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem. Maybe we could try to address it by, I don’t know, passing a budget or something.

talkingpoints on July 16, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Cajones found ?

FlaMurph on July 16, 2012 at 9:21 PM

If the DIMs want to play hardball on the Bush tax cuts, so be it…

Repubs should just cut spending 10% across the board, for starters… Lets see who wants to play…

Khun Joe on July 16, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Let the Democrats allow the Bush tax cuts expire and let Romney run on a promise to demand that Congress reinstate them retroactive to January 1st.

Obowma can tax anything he wants to… Judge Roberts said so.

Taxes must first pass thru the Congress. This makes them a political issue as Roberts said. Anyone who did not vote in 2006 and 2008 gave Pelosi-Reid-Obama the power they are using to dismantle America.

Laurence on July 17, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Doesn’t it say something about the Democrat Party when Patty Murray is the 4th senior member in the Senate. It would take a Dimocrat to suggest something like this. They won’t be happy until we (not they) are living back in the stone age, except we won’t be able to chop down the trees to keep the fires going that warm the hovels that we will live in.

georgeofthedesert on July 18, 2012 at 11:18 AM