Monthly Archives: June 2009

“The EPA will tell our farmers how to manage their farms … this bill will tax you.” Rep Frank Lucas — (R-OK), 6/26/09

Rep. Lucas is wrong. This bill specifically prohibits agriculture from being regulated under a carbon cap, which means farmers will not be “taxed.”

However, farmers will have the opportunity to voluntarily sell offsets, if they so choose. That will be a new income source for farmers who want to take advantage of the opportunity to reduce emissions from their operations.

What’s more, under the terms of the Manager’s Amendment, this program would be administered entirely by USDA — NOT by EPA — which is what a coalition of farm-state lawmakers wanted.

(Under some provisions of the American Clean Energy and Security Act) “homeowners can be charged $100 a day for not being in compliance .. it’s a new tax on homeowners” — Rep. Judy Biggert (R-IL), 6/26/09

Here we go again with the phony cost estimates. The costs of the bill, according to EPA and CBO estimates, will be much closer to $100 per YEAR, not per DAY.

And still, climate action opponents, with no apparent regard for facts or honest debate, have repeatedly, purposefully, blatently, obnoxiously rehashed the $3100/year figure even though the MIT economist who’s study was apparently the basis for this claim has vigorously refuted it.

Where do climate action opponents get their marching orders? Kafka?

In truth, this bill would establish strong targets for energy efficiency in homes and commercial buildings — and then have states, local governments and building-industry professionals tailor local codes to meet those targets, using the same processes they already use today.

In no way does the bill suggest homeowners would be subject to fines. That’s just fiction. Rather, enforcement would remain a local matter just as it is today.

Furthermore, the bill says that new efficiency measures must be cost-effective, meaning the savings homeowners and businesses will see on their utility bills must outweigh the cost of the measures. This will help keep down costs down and reduce our national energy use all at the same time.

“The CBO and API say that gas prices are going to go up 77 cents a gallon” — Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), 6/26/09

American Petroleum Institute (API) does say the CBO analysis ‘suggests’ gas prices would rise 77 cents a gallon.

Unfortunately, the CBO report doesn’t actually say anything of the kind — or ‘suggest’ it — or refer to it at all, really.

It’s not clear where API got this, but it’s certainly a shame Rep. Upton fell for it. A better estimate, from the EPA analysis, suggests gas prices will rise two-cents a year as a result of ACES. That’s nothing compared to the astronomical jumps in prices that brought us $4-dollar-a-gallon gas last year.

Maybe API has more information on those increases — since they do represent the oil and gas industries.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act is the “largest tax increase in American history under the guise of climate change legislation … there is no debate that this legislation will cost millions of American jobs.” – Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), 6/26/09

On the first point … sigh … here we go again.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the Congressional Budget Office each analyzed the American Clean Energy and Security Act separately. The EPA found a carbon cap would cost the average American household as little as $88-$140 per household per year over the life of the program – or about a dime a day per person.

The CBO got similar results; it found we could get all the benefits of a carbon cap for less than the cost of a postage stamp per day per household. Anyone who thinks that’s the biggest tax increase in America’s history needs to brush up on their history.

On the second point … the one about costing jobs … how about it will create jobs. Today, trailblazers in the renewable energy, energy efficiency and manufacturing sectors are already operating in every state in the U.S. Those companies are poised to grow — and create jobs – when ACES passes.

To see a snapshot of the huge economic opportunities, check out www.LessCarbonMoreJobs.org, an innovative online map that shows over 2,000 clean energy companies in 20 states.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act is “a new tax that will cost every American $1,500-3,000 a year.” Jeb Hensarling (TX-R), 6/26/09

How many times do we have to say it? The misquoted, misconstrued $3100 number is wrong. So wrong the author of the MIT report (where the NRCC got their numbers for their calculations) said the math is: “just wrong. It’s wrong in so many ways it’s hard to begin.”

The continued use of this wrong information at this point is nothing less than a deliberate lie to the American people.

Once again, let’s look at more accurate report. The EPA and the CBO both reported a carbon cap would cost less than the cost of a postage stamp per day per family.

It’s time to be honest with the American people.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act “would be the biggest tax in American history” – Rep. Pete Sessions, R-TX, 6/26/09

Wrong. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Congressional Budget Office each analyzed the American Clean Energy and Security Act separately.

The EPA found a carbon cap would cost the average American household as little as $88-$140 per household per year over the life of the program – or about a dime a day per person.

The CBO got similar results; it found we could get all the benefits of a carbon cap for less than the cost of a postage stamp per day per family. Anyone who thinks that’s the biggest tax increase in America’s history needs to brush up on their history.

The Wall Street Journal mistakenly accused the CBO of not considering the full range of costs to the economy, but all the costs they cite as missing were fully taken into account by the study.

What’s more, neither study looked at the costs of inaction — the astronomical costs of fixing the damage that will be caused by unchecked climate change.