Cot-Side Chat on Cap and Trade reponse (Part 2)

Featured on CNN.com...

I guess you can call this my first attempt at investigative journalism (while clearly exercising my right to editorialize).

My Congressman, Jason Chaffetz, is one of CNN.com's "Freshman Bloggers." His latest blog entry was titled, "Why we shouldn't use tax law as a weapon."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/31/chaffetz.bailouts/index.html

This edition of The Anglə is about how Chaffetz himself is basically using the word "tax" as a weapon of fear aimed at his own constituents.

The sources for my information follow:

Congressman Chaffetz' letter:
http://www.joepuente.org/chaffetz032709.pdf

Republican Ways & Means "Sources":

Camp Statement: Hearing on Addressing Price Volatility in Climate Change Legislation:
http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/showarticle.asp?ID=538

Camp-CBO Exchange on Cap-and-Tax Proposal:
http://republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/showarticle.asp?ID=540

Orszag: Energy Tax Will Cost Families An Average of At Least $500 More Than 'Make Work Pay' (n.b. this is not a direct quote):
http://www.republicans.waysandmeans.house.gov/showarticle.asp?ID=501

Event: 'Subcommittee On Energy And Mineral Resources: Oversight Hearing On Energy Outlooks, And The Role Of Federal Onshore And Offshore Resources In Meeting Future Energy Demand':
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/index.php?option=com_jcalpro&Itemid=2...

President Obama's Energy & Environment policy:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/energy_and_environment/

Republican Leader on "Stealth Tax":
http://republicanleader.house.gov/blog/?p=454

What is a "Stealth Tax"?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_tax

Peter Orszag's prepared statement to the House Ways & Means Committee:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/testimony/030409_budget.pdf

Transcript for March 4 Ways & Means Committee Hearing (unavailable as of 4/5/09):
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=detail&hearing=658

Linking Cap and Trade legislation to "Making Work Pay":
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secr...

The definition of "Tax":
http://www.investorwords.com/4879/tax.html

What is Cap & Trade/Emissions Trading?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cap_and_trade

'Emissions trading' a success, MIT report says
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/1997/emissions-1217.html

Democrats Take On GOP Climate Change Distortions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mOXPxyw90o

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• emissions
• trading
• cap
• and
• trade
• climate
• change
• jason
• chaffetz
• carbon
• tax
• Republican
• misleading

[xempla]

That's pretty close to what I thought Joseph. The initial payment for the credit goes to the government. One could stop there, and think tax, but no, he's actually purchased something of at least imagined worth, so it's like a tax, but that isn't exactly what it is.

I do know the government expects to make money. I've read that in many articles. I've never heard purchasing the credit is voluntary. That doesn't make sense. If it was, why would those purchasing credits care?

[josephpuente]

The choice is between buying carbon credits or paying heavy fines for exceeding the cap. It's kind of a strong-armed choice but a choice nonetheless. :-)

[xempla]

I' m going to rate you a positive star though, because I like the fact that made me think.

[josephpuente]

Thank you very much! And I appreciate your comments and criticism. Better to keep the conversation going maintaining open minds. :-)

[xempla]

BTW, you mention scare tactics, and fear mongering. But isn't cap n trade a reaction to the global warming scare.

Now me, I don't believe the science is in on that one. I don't think the debate is over. I don't even remember when the debate is supposed to have happened. It's chicken little, sky-is-falling, boogedy-boogedy to me.

It's fear mongering at it's finest. To complain about fear mongering then present that as the corner stone of your argument is hypocrisy.

[josephpuente]

The GOP doesn't want to make a distinction between companies buying CO2 credits from the government (which is voluntary) and paying taxes (which are mandatory). They claim that "the science isn't in" but that represents a minority in the scientific community. Their opposition to C&T is ideological and not scientific. i.e. they are only against C&T because the Dems are for it.

[xempla]

A great new video just went up here at YouTube tonight describing cap and trade clearly, and showing its problems.

It's called Clarity cap and trade.

[josephpuente]

buying CO2 credits from the government is voluntary so it is not a tax (which would be mandatory).

[josephpuente]

C&T in a nutshell: Gov places limits on (caps) CO2 emissions then issues or sells credits to companies allowing them to emit a specific amount of CO2 equal to the cap. If company A has 3 credits and uses only 2, they can sell the 3rd credit to company B who used up their credits. Company A can then use that money to upgrade their equipment to emit less CO2 while Company B can but itself some time to upgrade their equipment.

[xempla]

How exactly does this cap n trade thing work exactly, anyway?

As I thought I understood it the government puts a cap on CO2 emissions. It you go over, you pay the government money. If so, isn't that a tax? The government then decides where that money goes. Supposedly it goes to companies emitting CO2 below below the cap, but isn't Waxman now making deals in the back room for exemptions based on politics not the cap? If I'm right about all that it sounds pretty tax-y to me.