Today in Washington D. C. - June 2, 2008

On The Floor: Congress returned to work today! The Senate will consider the motion to proceed to the carbon emission cap-and-trade bill (S. 3036). The term “cap and trade” is doesn’t quite describe what this bill actually entails. The debate on the cap-and-trade bill is being driven by higher electric bills to more expensive gasoline and the possible economic cost of tackling global warming. A cloture vote on the motion to proceed is scheduled for 5:30 PM. If the Senate takes up the climate legislation, it will likely spend the rest of the week on the bill. Action is also possible soon on the missing title to the farm bill (H.R. 2419) and the budget resolution conference report (S. Con. Res. 70). The House is may take up the budget this week and could return to the supplemental war funding bill next week.

From News Sources: Robert J. Samuelson, The Washington Post, explained some of the problems with the cap-and-trade approach: “The chief political virtue of cap-and-trade -- a complex scheme to reduce greenhouse gases -- is its complexity. This allows its environmental supporters to shape public perceptions in essentially deceptive ways. Cap-and-trade would act as a tax, but it's not described as a tax. It would regulate economic activity, but it's promoted as a ‘free market’ mechanism. Finally, it would trigger a tidal wave of influence-peddling, as lobbyists scrambled to exploit the system for different industries and localities. This would undermine whatever abstract advantages the system has.”

George Will savaged the bill in his column yesterday, writing, “An unprecedentedly radical government grab for control of the American economy will be debated this week when the Senate considers saving the planet by means of a cap-and-trade system to ration carbon emissions.” “A carbon tax would be too clear and candid for political comfort,” Will wrote. “It would clearly be what cap-and-trade deviously is, a tax, but one with a known cost. . . . Cap-and-trade -- government auctioning permits for businesses to continue to do business -- is a huge tax hidden in a bureaucratic labyrinth of opaque permit transactions.”

National Review Online dialed in on another major consequence of this bill: “By rationing the use of fossil fuels, the bill would lead to higher coal, natural-gas, and petroleum prices, even though the prices of those commodities are already at historic highs.” That’s not all. According to The Wall Street Journal, “even the cap-and-trade friendly Environmental Protection Agency estimates that the bill would reduce GDP between $1 trillion and $2.8 trillion by 2050.”

The Boxer bill is raising concerns all across the political spectrum. The Denver Post reports that Sen. Ken Salazar is “concerned” about the bill and The Cleveland Plain Dealer notes that neither Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) or Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) supports the bill at the moment and adds, “The bill, as conceived, will just bore new holes into an already battered economy.”

While the Senate focuses on climate issues, though, it is important not to miss the positive news out of Iraq over the last week. The AP, Reuters, AFP, and the Los Angeles Times all reported that fewer American troops were killed in Iraq in May than any month since the beginning of the war. The Washington Post on Sunday discussing the improvements in Iraq over the last year: “the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments -- and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the ‘this-war-is-lost’ caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL).”

---

Tags: cap-and-trade, carbon emissions, US Congress, US Senate, Washington D.C. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!