03-31-2009, 02:15 PM
[size 4][#800000]WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, went to the Senate Floor on March 18, 2009 to expose the cap and trade tax scheme included in The Messiah’s budget. The following are excerpts of Senator Inhofe’s Senate Floor speech:[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“The Administration’s decision to include cap and trade—and the revenues generated by it—in the budget forces my colleagues here in the Senate to no longer hide the ball… It allows us to have an honest debate about the costs of a program of this magnitude on the American people—not to mention the enormous redistribution of wealth for pet projects and programs under the umbrella of ‘clean energy.’ To put it simply, they are realizing that cap and trade is a regressive energy tax that hits the Midwest and the South harder than the East or West Coasts.[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“In this time of recession and economic pain, the Administration and proponents of mandatory global warming controls now need to be honest with the American people. The purpose of these programs is to ration fossil-based energy by making it more expensive, and therefore less appealing for public consumption. It is a regressive tax that imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich. That is because the poor spend a larger percentage of their income on energy costs than the rich.[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“There is nothing in it for taxpayers, consumers or the climate. If it is time for anything, it is time for us to get realistic about these policies, and focus on what is achievable, both globally and domestically, to help bring down energy costs to consumers and make us more energy secure so the American public doesn’t get yet another raw deal.[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“Let us be honest. The total costs of the program will be well over the $646 billion when you factor in the private sector mandates and the total costs to reduce emissions. If past economic models are any indication, the total costs of a program could be 3 times more expensive than what the Administration’s numbers predict. And the Administration’s numbers of just the auction revenues aren’t small, roughly $80 billion per year.”[/#800000][/size]
[#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000]
[#800000][size 4]If you’d like to see all of Senator Inhofe’s comments, check out his press release [/size][/#800000][url "http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=1a19dbf7-802a-23ad-4d3a-501a2568fbf2"][#800000][size 4]here[/size][/#800000][/url][#800000][size 4].[/size][/#800000]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000][/font]
[#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000]
[#800000][size 4]If you’d like to see a breakdown on just the annual increase in electricity costs per capita, go [/size][/#800000][url "http://chaffetz.house.gov/2009/03/obama-administrations-cap-and-tax-proposal-bishop-and-chaffetz-opposed-to-301-billion-tax-increase-o.shtml"][#800000][size 4]here[/size][/#800000][/url][size 4][#800000].[/#800000][/size]
[signature]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“The Administration’s decision to include cap and trade—and the revenues generated by it—in the budget forces my colleagues here in the Senate to no longer hide the ball… It allows us to have an honest debate about the costs of a program of this magnitude on the American people—not to mention the enormous redistribution of wealth for pet projects and programs under the umbrella of ‘clean energy.’ To put it simply, they are realizing that cap and trade is a regressive energy tax that hits the Midwest and the South harder than the East or West Coasts.[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“In this time of recession and economic pain, the Administration and proponents of mandatory global warming controls now need to be honest with the American people. The purpose of these programs is to ration fossil-based energy by making it more expensive, and therefore less appealing for public consumption. It is a regressive tax that imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich. That is because the poor spend a larger percentage of their income on energy costs than the rich.[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“There is nothing in it for taxpayers, consumers or the climate. If it is time for anything, it is time for us to get realistic about these policies, and focus on what is achievable, both globally and domestically, to help bring down energy costs to consumers and make us more energy secure so the American public doesn’t get yet another raw deal.[/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000][/#800000][/size]
[size 4][#800000]“Let us be honest. The total costs of the program will be well over the $646 billion when you factor in the private sector mandates and the total costs to reduce emissions. If past economic models are any indication, the total costs of a program could be 3 times more expensive than what the Administration’s numbers predict. And the Administration’s numbers of just the auction revenues aren’t small, roughly $80 billion per year.”[/#800000][/size]
[#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000]
[#800000][size 4]If you’d like to see all of Senator Inhofe’s comments, check out his press release [/size][/#800000][url "http://inhofe.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=1a19dbf7-802a-23ad-4d3a-501a2568fbf2"][#800000][size 4]here[/size][/#800000][/url][#800000][size 4].[/size][/#800000]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000][/font]
[#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000]
[#800000][size 4]If you’d like to see a breakdown on just the annual increase in electricity costs per capita, go [/size][/#800000][url "http://chaffetz.house.gov/2009/03/obama-administrations-cap-and-tax-proposal-bishop-and-chaffetz-opposed-to-301-billion-tax-increase-o.shtml"][#800000][size 4]here[/size][/#800000][/url][size 4][#800000].[/#800000][/size]
[signature]