Senate debate starts today on the Lieberman-Warner “climate security” — AKA green boondoggle — bill. You can find the text here.
Sen. James Inhofe called it several weeks ago:
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, today commented on the Lieberman-Warner global warming cap-and-trade bill’s substitute amendment (Climate Security Act – S.2191).
“The latest version is nothing more than window dressing for a bill that has been exposed by numerous government and private analyses as costly and damaging to America,” Senator Inhofe said. “Lieberman-Warner will redistribute over $5.6 trillion from American consumers to pet congressional projects. Despite paying for the trillions of dollars mandated by this cap-and-trade scheme, American families and workers will only receive back $800 billion in consumer tax relief — $7 paid for every $1 returned.
“The fact is that the Lieberman-Warner bill is the largest pork bill ever considered by Congress. No matter how many revisions this bill undergoes, it remains a massive redistribution of wealth, the largest new tax and spend program in our Nation’s history. The handouts being offered by the sponsors of this bill come straight from the pocket of families and workers in the form of higher gas, power, and heating bills. The newly revised Lieberman-Warner bill offers nothing new except more pain at the gas pump and more expensive consumer goods.”
Sen. Inhofe’s backround and research on the bill here.
Aside: Will anyone mention the latest report on the U.N.’s massive carbon offset waste and fraud?
Entrepreneur Herman Cain minces no words in distilling the essence of the legislation:
The Lieberman-Warner bill is a cap-and-tax energy scheme, a carbon-emissions rationing program, a new tax on businesses and consumers, a new big government central agency and new career opportunities for thousands of new lobbyists specializing in greenhouse gas regulations…
… The bill also establishes the Carbon Market Efficiency Board, which shall report on the national greenhouse gas emission market and provide cost relief measures if it determines significant harm to the U.S. economy.
Give me a break!
The people who conceived and wrote this crap are obviously descendants of the same people who wrote the original tax code in 1913, the Social Security legislation in 1935, the Medicare bill of 1965 and the out-of-control prescription drug legislation of 2004.
Just look at how well all of these “the government knows best” programs are working today, and we have a good idea of where this latest giant leap for mankind will work for our grandchildren.
The Institute for Energy Research has extensive analysis of the costs of Lieberman-Warner.
Greg Mueller e-mails:
The U.S. Environmental protection Agency (EPA) analysis of the economic impacts of Lieberman-Warner assumes that carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology is deployable at scale across the entire U.S. electricity sector, and that there is a 150 percent increase in U.S. nuclear power generation by 2050. The EPA analysis also assumes that the U.S. complies with the Kyoto Protocol, which it currently does not.
Based on those assumptions, EPA concludes that Warner-Lieberman would result in annual reductions of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) ranging from $238 billion to $983 billion in 2030, and from roughly $1 trillion to more than $2.8 trillion in 2050; gasoline prices would increase by $0.53 per gallon in 2030 to $1.40 per gallon in 2050; and electricity prices are projected to increase 44 percent in 2030 and 26 percent in 2050.
The full EPA report is here.
What’s John McCain’s position?
Lieberman told the WSJ: “I’m confident in the end he’ll vote for it.”
But he won’t vote on it today. He’s going to miss the procedural vote on whether to move forward with the bill:
“I’m confident in the end he’ll vote for it,” Sen. Lieberman said.
Sen. McCain’s position on the climate-change bill is being closely watched by both opponents and supporters of the measure, partly because of his new role as the Republican Party’s presumptive presidential nominee and because of his efforts to distance himself on the issue from President Bush. Although the senator told an audience in Oregon this month that “the facts of global warming demand our urgent attention, especially in Washington,” he told reporters this week that he doesn’t actually plan to attend Monday’s procedural vote on whether to go forward on a debate of the bill. That means he may not have to take a position on the measure; if enough opponents of the bill vote to cut off debate on Monday, the measure could die a quick death.
Call your non-AWOL senators:
blog comments powered by Disqus
Republicans are actually pleased the legislation is coming to the floor at the moment, because they think it will given them a platform to talk about how emissions curbs will drive up already soaring energy costs. Conversely, some Democrats are far from thrilled.
The debate is likely to consume much of the week if not longer and should showcase a bit of presidential theater since all three presidential contenders are expected to be on hand at some point. It is also one of the issues where Senator John McCain has broken with some of his Republican colleagues in pressing for emissions curbs.
What other nastiness does global warming have in store for us? Future president Chelsea Clinton explains
March 23, 2017 04:45 PM by Doug Powers
March 15, 2017 10:02 PM by Doug Powers
The Academy Awards could rescue falling ratings with addition of ‘Outstanding Achievement in Eco-Hypocrisy’ category
February 28, 2017 11:28 AM by Doug Powers
February 28, 2017 09:37 AM by Doug Powers
2017 hits full stride early: Media slams White House & vice versa as witches cast spell on Trump admin
February 24, 2017 09:00 PM by Doug Powers