For those of  you wondering what the story is with a Treasury Department document that  purports to estimate the cost of climate legislation: it  doesn’t.
The Treasury Department  analysis simply quantifies the potential revenue from a hypothetical auction of  all pollution permits under a cap and trade bill.
Opponents of climate  change legislation are now firing up the fuzzy math machine again, dividing that  figure by the number of people in the country and concluding that cap and trade  will mean high costs for households. Sound familiar? That’s how House Minority  Leader John Boehner arrived at his roundly dismissed $3,100  figure.
It’s a flawed analysis of  a non-existent proposal.
Even if a 100 percent  auction was a live legislative proposal, which it’s not, that math ignores the  redistribution of revenue back to consumers. It only looks at one side of the  balance sheet. It would only be true if you think  the Administration was going to pile all the cash on the White House lawn and  set it on fire.
The bill passed by the  House sends the value of pollution permits to consumers, and it contains robust  cost-containment provisions. Every credible and independent economic analysis of  the American Clean Energy and Security Act (such as those done by the  non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the Energy Information Administration,  and the Environmental Protection Agency) says the costs will be small and  affordable — and that the U.S. economy will grow with a cap on  carbon.
For more info on what  well-designed cap and trade legislation will actually cost, please visit http://www.edf.org/climatecosts.