Destroying America

Rarely does Con­gress get to do some­thing so sweep­ing as what they are doing today. It’s usu­ally destruc­tion through evo­lu­tion as small lit­tle things get intro­duced over time. But not today. Today, they are vot­ing on the Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade bill, bet­ter known as The Amer­i­can Clean Energy and Secu­rity Act. This bill will mark a black line in the sand where Amer­ica went from being a leader in the indus­tri­al­ized world to a sec­ond tier coun­try. Think that’s hyper­bole? Read up on Waxman-Markey any at all and you’ll start to understand.

From the Investors Busi­ness Daily:

The Her­itage Foun­da­tion projects that by 2035 it would reduce aggre­gate gross domes­tic prod­uct by $7.4 tril­lion. In an aver­age year, 844,000 jobs would be destroyed, with peak years see­ing unem­ploy­ment rise by almost 2 mil­lion. Con­sumers would pay through the nose as elec­tric­ity rates would nec­es­sar­ily sky­rocket, as Pres­i­dent Obama once put it, by 90% adjusted for infla­tion. Inflation-adjusted gaso­line prices would rise 74%, res­i­den­tial nat­ural gas prices by 55% and the aver­age family’s annual energy bill by $1,500.

Hit hard­est by all this would be the “95% of work­ing fam­i­lies” Obama keeps men­tion­ing as being pro­tected from increased tax­a­tion. They are pro­tected, that is, unless they use energy. Then they’ll be hit by this dra­con­ian energy tax.

And what would we get for all this pain? Accord­ing to an analy­sis by Chip Knap­pen­berger, admin­is­tra­tor of the World Cli­mate Report, the reduc­tion of U.S. CO2 emis­sions to 83% below 2005 lev­els by 2050 — the goal of the Waxman-Markey bill — would reduce global tem­per­a­ture in 2050 by a mere 0.05 degree Celsius.

Jim Manzi at The Amer­i­can Scene has been writ­ing about this non-stop and has a post chock evi­dence detail­ing how hor­ri­ble this bill will be for America.

This bill would imple­ment dra­con­ian reg­u­la­tion in an effort to crip­ple Amer­ica, send wealth over­seas and all in exchange for a pos­si­ble low­er­ing of global tem­per­a­ture 41 years from now of .05 degrees Cel­sius. It’s a dis­as­ter. I urge you to con­tact your Rep­re­sen­ta­tive in Con­gress and ask them to vote against this bill.

3 Comments

  • seedub wrote:

    wow. i’m not for this bill either, but i’m com­pletely unwill­ing to write a let­ter to any­one based on the absurdly cre­ative math the her­itage foun­da­tion does. these guys are the cre­ation­ist move­ment of the eco­nomic world.

  • Scotch Drinker wrote:

    Jim Manzi has been doing plenty of work on the effects this bill would have over at The Amer­i­can Scene, includ­ing a decent shot at a Cost Ben­e­fit Analy­sis based on the esti­mates from the EPA and CBO. It’s not just the Her­itage Foun­da­tion that thinks this stinks to high heaven.

  • seedub wrote:

    see, now this is why i should always write then come back and read and edit, never just post. this thing does stink to high heaven, and i think the CBO and EPA num­bers bear that out. my point was sup­posed to be that the her­itage foundation’s num­bers are ridicu­lous, but that the things still smells. turns out i just took a shot at the HF and never both­ered with the rest of my thought. i give up. :-)

Leave a Reply

Your email is never shared.Required fields are marked *