Categories
Politics

Cap and Trade in a Nutshell

You may have heard a lot lately about the cap and trade bill which was recently sped through the House of Representatives and is currently in the Senate. And you may have, like I had, absolutely no idea what “cap and trade” — emissions trading — is all about.

I asked Dad for a bit of clarification, and here it is, as I understand it. [2019 note: Please do not make the mistake of thinking Dad agreed with my climate change denial in this post. He explained cap and trade well; I was just too tied up in a conservative mindset to know any better.]

Cap and trade legislation is intrinsically tied to the idea that not only is mankind somehow affecting the climate of Earth but that such effects are significant and could result in Very Bad Things.

The legislation would put into place measures which would curb the presumed causes of climate change by limiting how much carbon businesses would be allowed to release into the environment. This is the “cap” part. They would be able to purchase increased allowances and presumably be able to sell unused portions of their allotment to other businesses — the “trade” part.”

The legislation will increase the cost of energy. Electricity, natural gas, and even gasoline will be affected.

Various numbers have been tossed around as to how much more per year each household will have to pay for energy costs. Various conservative sources I’ve seen have cited anywhere from $1,700 to $3,000 per year per household. One source I’ve seen stated that the average household in (I think) Ohio would be paying $300 per month more just for electricity.

Liberal sources are quoting much lower costs, though, with increases of $150 to $200 per year per household. That’s obviously a much more palatable number!

But why is there a discrepancy?

The numbers quoted by the conservatives seem to be based on energy use remaining constant; in other words and for example, a household will be $1,500 more per year if the family makes no changes in their habits and way of life.

The lower numbers quoted by liberals take into account changes in lifestyle which they hope families will embrace.

So what does cap and trade legislation boil down to?

It is the national encouragement of a changed quality of life by those who buy into bunk science upon everyone, whether they accept the science or not.

You may not think your gas-powered car is having a negative effect on the environment, but to justify newer eco-friendly cars, the government wants to jack up the price of gasoline as an “encouragement” to drive what they want you to drive.

Yes, you’re right, cap and trade is an intrusive, manipulative mess.

Good thing I make less than $250,000 per year so that none of this extra burden will apply to me… Oh, wait…

7 replies on “Cap and Trade in a Nutshell”

Besides the monthly energy costs, the costs for just about everything related to owning a home (landlords own and would have to pass the costs on to tenants) are incredible. I’m in real estate and this bill will will definitely affect my clients. Check out this out from JamieWearingFool

Beyond what it will do to our economy, at the end of the debate House GOP Leader John Boehner took to the floor and started reading from the 300 page amendment that the Democrats drafted and dropped on the legislatures at 3 AM, there was literally hundred of items to impose federal control over your life. Here are some highlights.

Want to replace a window? Not so fast. First you must pay for an appraisal of your house to measure its energy efficiency and receive calculations of both before and after the proposed change. Hey, it may be a great excuse for those guys trying to avoid putting in that big bay style window that the missus has been bugging you about.

Are you having a new house built? Back up, Skippy. This bill includes language that tells you exactly where you can put your electrical outlets.

Did you know that for one sort of appraisal service related to determining energy efficiency there is only one company you can use? Yup, it is right in there along with the name of the company. How is it that this one company managed to land the only contract to service 300 million Americans? Who is this company?

I wish I could answer those questions, but all of those provisions and more, Rep. Boehner went on for almost an hour citing them and still didn’t get through the whole 300 pages, is not available. You see because of when the Democrats dropped this amendment at 3 AM the text of it is not available. So much for that transparency. The total bill runs on for more then 1500 pages and it controls every aspect of your life, from what type of car we will be able to produce and buy to what type of appliances you have in your house.

Under some of these provisions you won’t be able to sell your house. Got your eyes and a quaint little place out the way and off the beaten path? Forget about it. By the time you went through the time and expense to get it up to the new code proposed in this legislation that little place in the woods will resemble something out the Jetsons.

So for those who were at work and getting ready for their weekend, and were simply tired of the wall-to-wall coverage of Michael Jackson, you came just one more step closer to being less free today then you were yesterday. And by the way, Congress has blown town for a two-week vacation. It is hard work turning a Republic into a Socialist state. This must be stopped in the Senate.

My biggest fear now, however, is if the Republicans couldn’t stop this, a bill that will throw hundreds of thousands if not millions out of work as the companies they work for go belly up or leave the country and imposed what amounts to a national homeowners association on all of us, what chance do they have of stopping the nationalized health care?

My Republican Congressman says Cap and Trade will be good for America.
And, he caught the Green River Killer.
Did you catch the Green River Killer?
No, no you didn’t.
You can hear his interview here.

http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=194&sid=184941

Dave Reichert SPEAKS: says Cap and Trade will be good for America
He argued that the expense would not be what the Heartland Institute, Heritage Foundation, and Wall Street Journal were predicting. He argued that it would cost around $.48 per day and that we would have better national security, more nuclear, coal and refining capabilities, and a cleaner environment with the bill. He argued that the conservative arguments against were mistaken, and that Washington specifically would be better off even though the bill was imperfect.

And, he caught the Green River Killer.

Yeah, it took him a couple of decades, but better late than never.
I hear Fox was thinking about making the Series 24 about Reichert. But instead of showing 24 hours in a day they would have to make each episode a year.

I have not read the bill, so I cannot speak to the specifics that Benjamin lists. I would note that neither he nor the web site he links to make any effort to document the claims.

I did see that Jammie Wearing Fool links to Michelle Malkin who tries to claim that there is a “placeholder” in the bill. I encourage everyone to take a look:

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/01/here-is-the-cap-and-tax-placeholder-wheres-the-fine-print/

Now, if it isn’t too much trouble, you might want to go to the actual bill on line

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2454.EH:

and scroll down to the appropriate part of the table of contents, you will see that no such entry exists. (It is past halfway down. If you do a find for “subtitle B” it will be the third occurance, I believe).

So, lots of unsubstantiated claims and an outright, lets be generous, mistake.

Very convincing.

Make no mistake, if the bill requires I upgrade the windows before selling the house or that I pay a consultant for a study before I replace a window, etc., I will agree the bill should not pass. But I need evidence, not just claims.

I now see that the “placeholder” that Michelle Malkin referenced was in the bill “reported in the House”, but it is not in the bill passed by the house. So Michelle is citing the wrong version. Since the bill passed on June 26 and Michelle posted July 1 I think that’s a pretty big mistake, if it is one.

In this, the new era of responsibility, weren’t we supposed to be able to find these bills on one of the administration’s many sites for review? As far as I know, this bill was amended at 3AM the day of the vote, and those changes were not merged into the final bill before it was passed…? Didn’t the same thing happened with the so-called stimulus bill?

I think you’re confused, Claude… Nobody really expects anyone to keep campaign promises. They’re like movie trailers — they can make any movie look funny/action packed/emotional/awesome, no matter how lame/dull/boring/fail it is. Nothin’ but advertising, all of it, and we all know how honest ads are.

But by God, we’re Americans, and we have the right to be swindled by any manufacturer, producer, or politician that we want.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go dry the Great Lakes with my ShamWow.

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments must be made in accordance with the comment policy. Use your Gravatar-enabled email address while commenting to automatically enhance your comment with some of Gravatar's open profile data.

You may use Markdown to format your comments; additionally, these HTML tags and attributes may be used: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>