Republicans shifting towards climate change legislation.

[Direckshun]

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.

[CoMoChief]

The republican party is dead. There aren't any conservatives in Congress except for a handful of members.

They're just as bad as liberals except the rhetoric isn't as bad.

Just about every republican in office in DC is for big govt, more police state and more govt spending.

Time for you liberals to grow a ****ing spine, stop playing the left/right game and start looking for candidates that WILL make change....not these status quo globalist puppets.

You ever wonder why the majority of Congress walks out of DC 10x richer than when they came into office...meanwhile the gap between the rich and poor grows wider and wider by the day? The jokers don't care about anything than their own well being and sweetheart deals. Time for you libtards and neocons to wake the **** up.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

The republican party is dead. There aren't any conservatives in Congress except for a handful of members.

They're just as bad as liberals except the rhetoric isn't as bad.

Just about every republican in office in DC is for big govt, more police state and more govt spending.

Time for you liberals to grow a ****ing spine, stop playing the left/right game and start looking for candidates that WILL make change....not these status quo globalist puppets.

You ever wonder why the majority of Congress walks out of DC 10x richer than when they came into office...meanwhile the gap between the rich and poor grows wider and wider by the day? The jokers don't care about anything than their own well being and sweetheart deals. Time for you libtards and neocons to wake the **** up.

Yes and won't happen.

[HonestChieffan]

Climate change has nothing to do with it. Its all about a new avenue to add taxes. Be honest, no one sees a change in the climate as a result of one countey on the globe deciding to tax carbon. Wake the **** up. Diwreck and his cronies are on a tax mission period

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Climate change has nothing to do with it. Its all about a new avenue to add taxes. Be honest, no one sees a change in the climate as a result of one countey on the globe deciding to tax carbon. Wake the **** up. Diwreck and his cronies are on a tax mission period

Well ya, gots ta get payed ya knowz?

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

The climate is always changing so it is either warming or cooling.

And I am simply pointing out that if we accept the premise that humanity can change the climate in one direction then we must accept the premise that we can change it in the other. Hence if we can warm the planet we can cool it and if you think that it is asinine to think we can precipitate an ice age then you should re-examine your entire premise there sparky.

Your counter premises are feasible. Certainly humans could change the earth systems in ways that would act to cool the planet (global nuclear war for example). But that isn't our problem right now, because most of the forcing that human activity is currently introducing into the environment are forcings that tend to warm. So I don't see what your point is.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by cdcox

cli·mate   [klahy-mit]
noun
1. the composite or generally prevailing weather conditions of a region, as temperature, air pressure, humidity, precipitation, sunshine, cloudiness, and winds, throughout the year, averaged over a series of years.

I was being facetious. Lighten up Francis.

[RaiderH8r]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Your counter premises are feasible. Certainly humans could change the earth systems in ways that would act to cool the planet (global nuclear war for example). But that isn't our problem right now, because most of the forcing that human activity is currently introducing into the environment are forcings that tend to warm. So I don't see what your point is.

Dismissing the counter as farcical betrays the lie that the discussion is about climate change. In fact the discussion is about further taxing productivity.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

Dismissing the counter as farcical betrays the lie that the discussion is about climate change. In fact the discussion is about further taxing productivity.

Yup! This whole GW charade is nothing but a power grab....particularly for the UN.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r

Dismissing the counter as farcical betrays the lie that the discussion is about climate change. In fact the discussion is about further taxing productivity.

I'm not dismissing the counter. My only goal is for people to treat the science as science and the politics as politics. Sticking ones head in the sand about climate change makes as much sense as sticking ones head in the sand about the deficit. Just because you don't like the other side's solution, doesn't mean the problem isn't there.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Yup! This whole GW charade is nothing but a power grab....particularly for the UN.

This is true just as much as the idea that this whole deficit charade is just an excuse for the rich to kick the poor to the curb so they can keep more of their money.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by cdcox

This is true just as much as the idea that this whole deficit charade is just an excuse for the rich to kick the poor to the curb so they can keep more of their money.

Wow, seriously, just listen to how you sound.."so they can keep more of their money"....

[HonestChieffan]

Originally Posted by cdcox

This is true just as much as the idea that this whole deficit charade is just an excuse for the rich to kick the poor to the curb so they can keep more of their money.

Nice move to the top of the really stupid posts of the year

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by petegz28

Wow, seriously, just listen to how you sound.."so they can keep more of their money"....

Yes its rediculous. That was the whole point. The deficit is a real problem that will bite us in the ass if we don't deal with it. Same with climate change. There are many different political solutions that you can support or criticize, but to call either problem a fabrication created to allow one group or another to grab power isn't helpful. Come up with your own idea to address the problem, but saying the problem doesn't exist is harmful.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Yes its rediculous. That was the whole point. The deficit is a real problem that will bite us in the ass if we don't deal with it. Same with climate change. There are many different political solutions that you can support or criticize, but to call either problem a fabrication created to allow one group or another to grab power isn't helpful. Come up with your own idea to address the problem, but saying the problem doesn't exist is harmful.

Two realitites I want to drop on you:

1. The climate has, is and always will be changing.

2. The deficit is caused by spending more money than you have.

#1 we can do some good but little in the overall context

#2 is something we cand have a serious impact on. And yes, it was fabricated for a power grab. It's called politicians buying votes with money they don't have.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Yes its rediculous. That was the whole point. The deficit is a real problem that will bite us in the ass if we don't deal with it. Same with climate change. There are many different political solutions that you can support or criticize, but to call either problem a fabrication created to allow one group or another to grab power isn't helpful. Come up with your own idea to address the problem, but saying the problem doesn't exist is harmful.

Where are the spelling Nazis when someone they agree with spells something wrong?

It's ridiculous.