Schumer: Hey, who’s up for a Hillary-imposed carbon tax?

posted at 8:01 pm on June 24, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

Who wouldn’t be? Well, Hillary Clinton for one, at least while on the campaign trail. Chuck Schumer’s proposal for a new revenue stream for Washington DC became so toxic that Barack Obama dropped it years ago, but now Schumer wants to revive the unpopular idea and tie it around Hillary’s neck, and the necks of Democrats running for the Senate in 2016:

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) outlined a path Tuesday for Hillary Clinton to enact a carbon tax if the Democrats prevail in the 2016 elections.

Schumer, the Senate Democrats’ leader-in-waiting, said that a Clinton presidency and the return of his party to the Senate majority in 2017 could pave the way for lawmakers to enact a carbon tax to help fund the government.

The mere suggestion of a new fee on the emissions blamed for climate change, however, could become a political headache for Clinton and other Democrats, and it’s routinely dismissed by Republicans. The Obama administration disavowed the idea after the 2012 election.

Schumer wants the money for the general fund, arguing that Republicans have been “starving” Washington DC and that the GOP would largely agree with that assessment. Of course, Schumer doesn’t mention that Republicans would consider that a feature rather than a bug, although the “starvation” in this case still represents 17.5% of GDP in FY2014, and an estimated 17.7% in FY2015, with those numbers increasing to 19.3% by FY2020 under current budget projections. The “starvation” rate in FY2014 is the highest level since FY2007’s 17.9%, and is the second-highest level since FY2001’s 18.8%.

The general-fund argument is important, because it makes the least compelling case for a carbon tax to voters. The Washington Post fact-checked polling claims from carbon-tax advocates and made this clear:

An April 2014 Yale/George Mason survey also found 55 percent in support of “requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax and use money to pay down the national debt.” But when the same question was asked in a follow-up version with a price — an average $180 a year for the average household — only 36 percent of registered voters supported it, and 62 percent opposed it.

The public’s enthusiasm for the carbon tax also was sensitive to what the tax revenues would potentially fund. For example, a July 2014 survey by the University of Michigan’s Center for Local, State and Urban Policy  found that most Americans oppose a carbon tax when there is no specified use for the tax revenue. A revenue-neutral carbon tax, in which the revenues are returned to the public as a rebate check, received 56 percent support. Sixty percent supported a tax with revenues used to fund research and development for renewable energy programs.

Hillary Clinton is already getting pushed farther and farther to left without help from Schumer. She hardly needs to add a plank to the platform bragging about how she plans to make energy costs “necessarily skyrocket,” to use Obama’s phrase from January 2008, as an integral part of her campaign. Of course, that’s exactly what a tax on energy consumption will do, as producers pass along the costs of the tax to consumers, who then presumably forget that if and when rebate checks or tax credits show up at the end of the year.

That won’t even fly in Minnesota, where these kind of pie-in-the-sky interventions seem to sell better than elsewhere. At the moment, Hillary isn’t selling well here either, as the left-leaning MinnPost reports this morning. Her approval rating in this blue state is only 35%, and is 14 points underwater:

The Minnesota Jobs Coalition and The Tarrance Group conducted the poll June 9, 10, and 11, sampling 600 voters by landline and cell phone. Yes, the Tarrance Group polls for Republican candidates, but it also produces the Georgetown University Battleground poll, a bipartisan political survey conducted with Democratic pollster Lake Research Partners. The poll has a margin of error four percentage points.

Clinton has the approval of 35 percent of likely voters contacted for the survey, with 49 percent saying they disapprove of her.

Dayton has a 51 percent approval rating and 42 percent disapproval, nearly identical to the 600-person Star Tribune poll taken in March. …

Among women voters, Clinton has a 40 percent approval and a 46 disapproval rating, weaker than in some national surveys. Among unmarried women, her approval climbs to 42 percent, with 43 percent disapproving. Among married women, her approval drops to 39 percent, with 48 percent disapproving.

If Hillary puts Schumer in charge of the campaign, this could be a high-water mark.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Climate Scientists Reaching Unprecedented Levels Of Stupid: https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/06/24/climate-scientists-reaching-unprecedented-levels-of-stupid/

anotherJoe on June 24, 2015 at 8:08 PM

We deserve her.

PappyD61 on June 24, 2015 at 8:08 PM

Hillary is the Hubert Humphrey of 2016. She won’t win.

kcewa on June 24, 2015 at 8:08 PM

Where is Hilts to tell us how Hillary will eat the Republican candidate and their dog for breakfast??? I’m going to make some pop corn, this should be amusing…

oscarwilde on June 24, 2015 at 8:14 PM

Oh, please keep “helping”, Chuckles.

rbj on June 24, 2015 at 8:15 PM

A good post from Steven Goddard exposing the absurdity of warmist claims about runaway warming:

Hottest Year Ever Update

https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/hottest-year-ever-update-16/

Two graphics at the link show how it obviously was much hotter … in 1934 than now.

In June, 1934 half of the US was over 100 degrees. So far this June, only a tiny percentage of stations have been over 100 degrees. The percentage of US stations reaching 100 degrees in June has plummeted over the past 80 years.
——– —— ——- —
The greatest place for skeptical news and links is Tom Nelson’s twitter page: https://twitter.com/tan123
——– —— ——- —
Plus, this 4 minute video shows clearly and convincingly, and contrary to previous claims by the IPCC and Algore, that there is ZERO actual evidence that CO2 affects climate temperatures: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg&info=GGWarmingSwindle_CO2Lag

anotherJoe on June 24, 2015 at 8:15 PM

Plus, underwater in the Land of 10,000 Lakes.

Clearly we need to ban the Minnesota state flag. Sorry Ed.

(Is that a farmer stealing Indian land?)

kcewa on June 24, 2015 at 8:19 PM

Well, if Anthropogenic Climate Disruption, the biggest scientastic hoax of all time, can’t get world tax dollars pouring into the hands of the Globalists, then maybe the vintage U.S. version will just have to do… for now…

Schumer sux.

ROCnPhilly on June 24, 2015 at 8:24 PM

You first, Chuckie..

celt on June 24, 2015 at 8:25 PM

Plus, underwater in the Land of 10,000 Lakes.

Clearly we need to ban the Minnesota state flag. Sorry Ed.

(Is that a farmer stealing Indian land?)

kcewa on June 24, 2015 at 8:19 PM

I was thinking we should just plain ban Minnesota, you know, just to be safe, cause anywhere that can and does regularly make California look sane and rational, well, perhaps we should just take off and nuke it from orbit…

oscarwilde on June 24, 2015 at 8:27 PM

You mean, the General Slush Fund?

vnvet on June 24, 2015 at 8:29 PM

Where is Hilts to tell us how Hillary will eat the Republican candidate and their dog for breakfast?

oscarwilde on June 24, 2015 at 8:14 PM

C’mon, dontcha know, the dog is eaten already.

Rix on June 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM

And the carbon tax is regressive as hell, too.

Buck Farky on June 24, 2015 at 8:36 PM

Energy is the foundation of productive civilization, of industry. That’s why the left wants to hit energy hard. Here’s a quote by Obama’s current Science Czar, from 1973:

“A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States.” -John Holdren (1973), Obama’s current Science Czar

This was 1973, way before the global warming scare had gained credence (Holdren was actually fear mongering about global cooling at the time.) The left has wanted to de-develop the world (or at least the United States!) for decades, and global warming conveniently became their answer or “solution” that fits their desire for de-industrialization.

And taxing energy is the best and quickest way to hobble an economy.

“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing.” -leftist Senator Tim Wirth, 1993

And we got this, a quote from I think the late ’80s, from the man the considered the pioneering founder of global warming scare tactics:

“Isn’t the only hope for this planet the total collapse of industrial civilisation? Is it not our responsibility to ensure that this collapse happens?” -Maurice Strong, ex UNEP Director

Read this one again as well:

“We have to offer up scary scenarios… each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective and being honest.” -Stephen Schneider, lead ipcc author, 1989

anotherJoe on June 24, 2015 at 8:38 PM

Well according to the Climate Hoax high priests it’s too late anyway. Our species will be extinct in 100 years. So to heck with policies. Light a carbon based fire and party on. Somores anyone?

Deadeye on June 24, 2015 at 8:39 PM

Carbon is Black, Hillary wants to raise a Black Tax. Who will be hurt most by a Black Tax… Why does Hillary hate Black Middle Class Americans?

oscarwilde on June 24, 2015 at 8:40 PM

Hillary is a horrible candidate. Just wait for her to be on the campaign trail regularly. Well, assuming she doesn’t dodge the media until the fall 2016 debates.

Aizen on June 24, 2015 at 8:41 PM

So, people support a carbon tax until they learn that it us they who will be paying for it? All they have to do us say that it is a tax on the wealthy to get support.

Techster64 on June 24, 2015 at 8:42 PM

Hey Rubio, ya schmuck, how was your fling with the dog? I can’t get over just how not bright you were and are.

arnold ziffel on June 24, 2015 at 8:45 PM

That picture is sick and sickening.

Schadenfreude on June 24, 2015 at 8:53 PM

That won’t even fly in Minnesota, where these kind of pie-in-the-sky interventions seem to sell better than elsewhere. At the moment, Hillary isn’t selling well here either…

She isn’t selling well anywhere. Her national aggregate poll average UNFAVORABILITY RATING is teetering on the edge of 50%. Meaning half the country doesn’t like her. Her favorability rating is already below water nationally at 45%.

And this national aggregate poll average is not a spiky up-and-down thing. Granny Clinton has been steadily declining in the public eye since mid-May 2001, a trend that sharply accelerated after the 2012 election, costing her almost 10 points from then to now.

She can’t even get a campaign re-start bump.

de rigueur on June 24, 2015 at 9:10 PM

Nice picture of two bags.

grumpyank on June 24, 2015 at 9:25 PM

What in the he!! is that on her left cheek?

Creepy.

Barred on June 24, 2015 at 9:29 PM

What in the he!! is that on her left cheek?

Creepy.

Barred on June 24, 2015 at 9:29 PM

Yes, it looks like a huge ooze filled pustule.

I think though in reality it’s just the way the light and the camera are interacting with that part of her puffy face that on close inspection is probably the just the same as her other cheek. It does go to show that she’s no spring chicken or beauty queen, lol. But she’s a cap & trade carbon tax hustler.

anotherJoe on June 24, 2015 at 10:01 PM

Schumer, the Senate Democrats’ leader-in-waiting, said that a Clinton presidency and the return of his party to the Senate majority in 2017 could pave the way for lawmakers to enact a carbon tax to help fund the government.

Interesting that Schumer breezily assumes that Speaker Boehner will give Democrats a carbon tax approval in the House. To be fair, I guess Boehner is the Democrats’ ‘go to’ guy when they want their agenda passed into law.

RJL on June 24, 2015 at 11:00 PM

The Chamber of Commerce Conies are all on board. So is Romney, YES HE SAID IT, Screwbio will sign up, The Dauphin Jeb, just about all the establishment GOP.

The 0bama/Clinton Crime Family and the Bush Mafia gopE, perfect together in the “District of Corruption.”

Jayrae on June 25, 2015 at 6:53 AM

A Carbon Tax ! We pay too much money for gasoline and other forms of energy now ! No wonder our economy is collapsing. The Democrat party is doing everything they can to destroy our economic-system. Has anyone noticed how everyone is now driving smaller cars ? If we continue to let the price of energy balloon up out of sight, we will soon have fifty percent of our population cruising down the freeways on 50 cc motorbikes ! Please ! We have got to keep Hillary out of the White House. She will only continue the totally bankrupt monetary philosophy of Barack Obama !

Bugdust172 on June 25, 2015 at 11:38 PM