House Democratic leaders must be in a state of shock. The EPA announced that the Waxman-Markey Bill, the cap-and-trade bill, would not “materially effect global carbon concentrations in the atmosphere.” Why then are Americans being asked to take on $9 trillion ($9,000,000,000,000) worth of spending from 2012-2050 for nothing?
Sen. Inhofe (R – Okla.) said “that unilateral action by the U.S. will be all cost for no climate gain…. acting alone through the job-killing Waxman-Markey bill would impose severe economic burdens on American consumers, businesses, and families, all without any impact on climate.”
This EPA announcement has not caused any change in the Obama administration’s stance on the so-called “cap-and-trade” bill going through Congress. The president’s team insists that the bill is an essential part of his agenda and that it will both create new jobs and not be a burden to the economy. In the past, energy secretary Steven Chu has said, “Denial of the climate-change problem will not change our destiny; a comprehensive energy and climate bill that caps and then reduces carbon emissions will.”
Given the EPA announcement that this bill won’t help the environment, it seems reasonable to expect a change in the administration’s position. But that expectation is not going to be met. Chu still holds firm to the administrations policy and responded to the report by saying “No, I don’t agree with the [EPA] chart.” Who is a denier now?
Inhofe has extended “an invitation to the secretary to see whether he wants to clarify his remarks.” Chu has yet to respond.
Concurring with the EPA’s report, research from MIT concluded, “The different U.S. policies have relatively small effects on the CO2 concentration if other regions do not follow the U.S. lead.”
And these “other regions” — specifically India and China — have no intention of following the U.S. lead in burdening themselves with environmental taxes such as “cap and trade.” At the Group of 8 summit in L’Aquila, Italy, the New York Times reported that “[t]he world’s biggest developing nations, led by China and India, refused Wednesday to commit to specific goals for slashing heat-trapping gases by 2050, undercutting the drive to build a global consensus by the end of this year to reverse the threat of climate change.”
In the end, countries, like people, act with their pocket books in mind. The bottom line is that cap and trade legislation does not support prosperity no matter how the administration feels.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter