Environment Republicans shifting towards climate change legislation. - Page 4

Direckshun · 11-13-2012, 06:07 AM

Thank you god.

Can we get this done in the next two years, please?

Norquist seems to be pushing for it to be part of the Grand Bargain. The last time Obama scored energy legislation it was wrapped up in the stimulus package. Wrapping up more energy legislation in a Grand Bargain would be consistent with that -- never let an opportunity go to waste, amiright?

http://www.nationaljournal.com/energ...ledge-20121112

Norquist: Carbon-Tax Swap for Income-Tax Cut Wouldn't Violate No-Tax-Hike Pledge
Coral Davenport
November 12, 2012 | 5:09 p.m.

In a step that may help crack open the partisan impasse on climate change, Grover Norquist, the influential lobbyist who has bound hundreds of Republicans to a pledge never to raise taxes, told National Journal that a proposed “carbon tax swap”—taxing carbon pollution in exchange for cutting the income tax—would not violate his pledge.

Norquist’s assessment matters a lot, and could help pave the way for at least a handful of Republicans to support the policy. Over the past six months, a growing number of conservative voices, including former Republican officials and renowned economists, have amped up pressure on their party to finally address climate change.

One group, the Energy and Enterprise Initiative headed by former Rep. Bob Inglis, R-S.C., has been working for months to persuade the GOP to take up a carbon-tax swap as part of a broad tax-reform package next year. The idea is to create a market signal to drive consumers away from fossil fuels by taxing the carbon pollution caused by burning coal, oil, and natural gas.

The problem is that creating a new “energy tax” would be viewed by some as political suicide. And Republicans who have signed Norquist’s pledge would be barred from supporting it.

That’s where the “swap” side of the policy comes in: The new carbon tax would be paired with a cut in the income tax—something Republicans have long sought. The idea essentially would be to cut the tax on income and move it over to carbon pollution—keeping the proposal revenue-neutral.

“It’s possible you could structure something that wasn’t an increase and didn’t violate the pledge,” Norquist told National Journal.

But Norquist made clear he himself doesn’t like the policy. “It would infuriate taxpayers,” he said. He also opined that politically, it’s beyond a long shot. While supporters might now be talking about how to structure the tax swap in such a way that it could win political support, “It’s a conversation about what color unicorn you’d like,” Norquist said.

“If the Democrats thought it was a good idea and the country wouldn’t hate them for it they would have done it in 2009,” when their party held majorities in both chambers of Congress, he said.

Still, if the tax swap could indeed be structured in such a way that it wouldn’t violate Norquist’s pledge, it could remove at least one political obstacle for some Republicans.

“We hear frequently, constantly from Republican lawmakers who say, we see climate change as a huge problem and we want to talk about ways to do this, but for now they’re afraid to talk about it, because of the political repercussions,” said Rob Sisson, president of the group ConservAmerica, formerly Republicans for Environmental Protection.

Conversation about a carbon tax is increasing in Washington. In September, the Congressional Budget Office released a report concluding that a carbon tax on its own—not paired with a tax cut elsewhere—could reduce the federal deficit by 10 percent to 50 percent.

The day after the presidential election, the global bank HSBC put out a research note identifying a carbon tax as a policy that could emerge in President Obama’s second term.

On Tuesday, the Brookings Institution hosts a daylong conference on the economics of a carbon tax, featuring speakers from CBO, the Treasury Department, and the International Monetary Fund.

Garcia Bronco · 11-13-2012, 01:45 PM

Again...I don't know who I find more amusing...the people that say Man is warming the globe, or the people that think we can do something about it.

KILLER_CLOWN · 11-13-2012, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

Some rich people are going to get richer off of this, the poor will pay more for everything they buy, and the weather will continue to give zero ****s what we do.

QFT here, if issue <> dead then go to kill mode.

KILLER_CLOWN · 11-13-2012, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

Again...I don't know who I find more amusing...the people that say Man is warming the globe, or the people that think we can do something about it.

I've warmed quite a few globes in my day, no one offered to pay any carbon taxes on it though.

BucEyedPea · 11-13-2012, 02:10 PM

No man can warm my globes!

OUCH! Did I just post that?

**patteeu** · 11-13-2012, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Your preferential course of action, then?

Stop foolishly trying to hamstringing our own economy in an effort to save the world that can't possibly succeed.

**J Diddy** · 11-13-2012, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Please Ari said the US government caused the tornado in Joplin.

WTF are you talking about dumbass?

BucEyedPea · 11-13-2012, 05:58 PM

Government is not the answer to climate change. Innovative economic, social and cultural entrepreneurs rather than politicians are.

RaiderH8r · 11-13-2012, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

Making everything more expensive is the answer!

And then they will institute another energy welfare program to pay for the costs they jacked up in the first place.

ChiefsCountry · 11-13-2012, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Diddy

WTF are you talking about dumbass?

Ari, teedubya whatever the hell his name is now started a thread that the US government created harp rings that caused the tornado in Joplin.
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=245462

Donger · 11-13-2012, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I am not sure when it happened, but climate change is more or less a more complete description of the issue than the phrase global warming.

For all intents and purposes, it's the same thing.

You didn't address the "why" part.

Direckshun · 11-13-2012, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

You didn't address the "why" part.

Climate change is more or less a more complete description of the issue than the phrase global warming.

Donger · 11-13-2012, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Climate change is more or less a more complete description of the issue than the phrase global warming.

Yes, I know. And why has "global warming" been replaced with "climate change"? You acknowledge that "global warming" was the common phrase over the last few years, yes?

Direckshun · 11-13-2012, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Yes, I know. And why has "global warming" been replaced with "climate change"? You acknowledge that "global warming" was the common phrase over the last few years, yes?

Right.

But climate change is more or less a more complete description of the issue than the phrase global warming.

BucEyedPea · 11-13-2012, 06:27 PM

Climate change happens all the time in nature. For instance, winter is coming and it's getting colder.

Donger · 11-13-2012, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Right.

But climate change is more or less a more complete description of the issue than the phrase global warming.

So you would agree that there has been a shift from the specific (i.e. global warming) to the general (i.e., climate change), yes?

11-13-2012, 06:07 AM
Direckshun Black for Palestine Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Springpatch Casino cash: $1166505	Republicans shifting towards climate change legislation. Thank you god. Can we get this done in the next two years, please? Norquist seems to be pushing for it to be part of the Grand Bargain. The last time Obama scored energy legislation it was wrapped up in the stimulus package. Wrapping up more energy legislation in a Grand Bargain would be consistent with that -- never let an opportunity go to waste, amiright? http://www.nationaljournal.com/energ...ledge-20121112 Norquist: Carbon-Tax Swap for Income-Tax Cut Wouldn't Violate No-Tax-Hike Pledge Coral Davenport November 12, 2012 \| 5:09 p.m. In a step that may help crack open the partisan impasse on climate change, Grover Norquist, the influential lobbyist who has bound hundreds of Republicans to a pledge never to raise taxes, told National Journal that a proposed “carbon tax swap”—taxing carbon pollution in exchange for cutting the income tax—would not violate his pledge. Norquist’s assessment matters a lot, and could help pave the way for at least a handful of Republicans to support the policy. Over the past six months, a growing number of conservative voices, including former Republican officials and renowned economists, have amped up pressure on their party to finally address climate change. One group, the Energy and Enterprise Initiative headed by former Rep. Bob Inglis, R-S.C., has been working for months to persuade the GOP to take up a carbon-tax swap as part of a broad tax-reform package next year. The idea is to create a market signal to drive consumers away from fossil fuels by taxing the carbon pollution caused by burning coal, oil, and natural gas. The problem is that creating a new “energy tax” would be viewed by some as political suicide. And Republicans who have signed Norquist’s pledge would be barred from supporting it. That’s where the “swap” side of the policy comes in: The new carbon tax would be paired with a cut in the income tax—something Republicans have long sought. The idea essentially would be to cut the tax on income and move it over to carbon pollution—keeping the proposal revenue-neutral. “It’s possible you could structure something that wasn’t an increase and didn’t violate the pledge,” Norquist told National Journal. But Norquist made clear he himself doesn’t like the policy. “It would infuriate taxpayers,” he said. He also opined that politically, it’s beyond a long shot. While supporters might now be talking about how to structure the tax swap in such a way that it could win political support, “It’s a conversation about what color unicorn you’d like,” Norquist said. “If the Democrats thought it was a good idea and the country wouldn’t hate them for it they would have done it in 2009,” when their party held majorities in both chambers of Congress, he said. Still, if the tax swap could indeed be structured in such a way that it wouldn’t violate Norquist’s pledge, it could remove at least one political obstacle for some Republicans. “We hear frequently, constantly from Republican lawmakers who say, we see climate change as a huge problem and we want to talk about ways to do this, but for now they’re afraid to talk about it, because of the political repercussions,” said Rob Sisson, president of the group ConservAmerica, formerly Republicans for Environmental Protection. Conversation about a carbon tax is increasing in Washington. In September, the Congressional Budget Office released a report concluding that a carbon tax on its own—not paired with a tax cut elsewhere—could reduce the federal deficit by 10 percent to 50 percent. The day after the presidential election, the global bank HSBC put out a research note identifying a carbon tax as a policy that could emerge in President Obama’s second term. On Tuesday, the Brookings Institution hosts a daylong conference on the economics of a carbon tax, featuring speakers from CBO, the Treasury Department, and the International Monetary Fund.
Posts: 37,488

11-13-2012, 01:45 PM	#46
Garcia Bronco No Keys, No Problem Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Denver Casino cash: $59478	Again...I don't know who I find more amusing...the people that say Man is warming the globe, or the people that think we can do something about it.
Posts: 20,356

11-13-2012, 02:10 PM	#49
BucEyedPea Frazod Loves Hammy Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: None of your business Casino cash: $48568	No man can warm my globes! OUCH! Did I just post that? __________________ "In government, the scum rises to the top."~ Hayek
Posts: 46,515

11-13-2012, 05:58 PM	#52
BucEyedPea Frazod Loves Hammy Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: None of your business Casino cash: $48568	Government is not the answer to climate change. Innovative economic, social and cultural entrepreneurs rather than politicians are. __________________ "In government, the scum rises to the top."~ Hayek
Posts: 46,515

11-13-2012, 06:27 PM	#59
BucEyedPea Frazod Loves Hammy Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: None of your business Casino cash: $48568	Climate change happens all the time in nature. For instance, winter is coming and it's getting colder. __________________ "In government, the scum rises to the top."~ Hayek
Posts: 46,515

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode