Are You Ready For Yet Another Conservative Case For Climate Action?
Here we go again: yet another plan to deal with anthropogenic climate change/global warming/we’re doomed!!!!!!!! from a supposedly Conservative point of view. A plan that proves that some Republicans aren’t Conservative in the least, especially when they go running to the NY Times for validation
CRAZY as it may sound, this is the perfect time to enact a sensible policy to address the dangerous threat of climate change. Before you call us nuts, hear us out.
Yeah, it does sound crazy. Several paragraphs are spent yammering on about how Obama did his climate schtick via regulation, and how Trump has promised to reduce regulations.
On-again-off-again regulation is a poor way to protect the environment. And by creating needless uncertainty for businesses that are planning long-term capital investments, it is also a poor way to promote robust economic growth.
By contrast, an ideal climate policy would reduce carbon emissions, limit regulatory intrusion, promote economic growth, help working-class Americans and prove durable when the political winds change. We have laid out such a plan in a paper to be released Wednesday by the Climate Leadership Council.
How will they do this? First, let’s see who these so-called Conservatives are
Our co-authors include James A. Baker III, Treasury secretary for President Ronald Reagan and secretary of state for President George H. W. Bush; Henry M. Paulson Jr., Treasury secretary for President George W. Bush; George P. Shultz, Treasury secretary for President Richard Nixon and secretary of state for Mr. Reagan; Thomas Stephenson, a partner at Sequoia Capital, a venture-capital firm; and Rob Walton, who recently completed 23 years as chairman of Walmart.
Let’s see this plan
First, the federal government would impose a gradually increasing tax on carbon dioxide emissions. It might begin at $40 per ton and increase steadily. This tax would send a powerful signal to businesses and consumers to reduce their carbon footprints.
Yup, government increasing taxes on the private sector and citizens to control their behavior is certainly conservative, amIright?
Second, the proceeds would be returned to the American people on an equal basis via quarterly dividend checks. With a carbon tax of $40 per ton, a family of four would receive about $2,000 in the first year. As the tax rate rose over time to further reduce emissions, so would the dividend payments.
Making citizens more reliant on government is certainly conservative, right? Do the math: the average carbon footprint for each American is over 19 metric tons. So, a family of four would be charged $3,040 to start out, meaning they are paying more in fees/taxes, which doesn’t even account for all the cost of living increases caused by this plan. This is actually the sleight of hand that is being pushed by many hardcore leftist Warmists, such as James Hansen.
The third point is about rebates and taxes on imports and exports, followed by one on repealing regulations made unnecessary by this massive tax and control policy, including the Clean Power Plan.
Republicans are in charge of both Congress and the White House. If they do nothing other than reverse regulations from the Obama administration, they will squander the opportunity to show the full power of the conservative canon, and its core principles of free markets, limited government and stewardship.
It bears repeating: conservative canon doesn’t include raising taxes, which causes a cost of living increase, while increasing the power of the central government over citizens while also making them more dependent on centralized government.
Much better would be a strategy of “repeal and replace.” This would be pro-growth, pro-competitiveness and pro-working class, which aligns perfectly with President Trump’s stated agenda.
This is all pro-bullshit.