- Interior Department Hides Data, Pushes Back Offshore Drilling Plan
- It May be Sunshine Week, But There Are Dark Clouds over the Slaughter House (CFA Site »)
- Bill McCollum Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in Florida Governor's Race
- Sen. Lincoln (D-Ark.) New Ad: I'm not working for the unions
- Making Laws Should Be Transparent
- CFA in Washington Times: Read the Bill! (CFA Site »)
- How the FCC Plans to Tax the Internet (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Study: Health Care Legislation Will Cost up to 700,000 Jobs by 2019
- Comprehensive List of Tax Hikes in Government Health Bill to be Voted on by House
- Testimony Before U.S. House Appropriations Committee on Labor
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
- The Second Annual Pat Quinn Income Tax Increase Proposal
- How the FCC Plans to Tax the Internet
- Oh, the Irony! It's Sunshine Week, So Let's Push Healthcare Bill Through Without Even Voting On It!? (CFA Site »)
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
- Wisconsin Gubernatorial Candidate Scott Walker Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge
- Why Do We Get Health Insurance from Our Employers Anyway? (ASA Site »)
- The Enormous Price Tag of Government Run Healthcare (ASA Site »)
- Call for Sunshine Week: "Just Give Us The Earmark Data" (CFA Site »)
- PA-12 Special Election Update: Tim Burns Signs the Taxpayer Protection Pledge
- How Government Accounting Works
- ATRF Analysis: The Importance of International Tax Competition
- How Tax Preparation "Simplification" Will Lead to Tax Hikes
- GAO: Implementation of Coburn-Obama Still Lacking in Some Areas (CFA Site »)
Monday, March 15, 2010
- Latest Developments In The Fight To Stop A Govt Internet Takeover
- China Buys Our Debt, We Give Them Renewable Energy Stimulus Jobs...Seems About Right
- ATR Urges Governor McDonnell to Sign Bill to Abolish State Run Tax Filing
- Saving the Sea Turtles...But at What Cost? (PRA Site »)
- Craig Miller Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in FL-24
- The Economics of #StimulusFail
- Missouri Unions and Andy Stern on the Same Page: Raise Taxes (AWF Site »)
- Obamacare, Free Trade, & Our Economic Prosperity
Friday, March 12, 2010
- Rusty Bowers Signs the Taxpayer Protection Pledge for AZ-01 Race
- Ask Your Virginia Legislator to Vote "NO" on Any Budget Containing Higher Taxes
-
ATR Supports H.R. 4781, the
"Keeping American Businesses
Competitive Act of 2010" - Ronald Reagan Legacy Project Urges Naming of California High School After Reagan
- Democrats Attempt to Subvert Congress in Hopes of Carbon Regulation
- Economic Issues Dominate at the Bloggers Briefing
- Pushback Against EPA’s Attempts to Regulate Carbon Emissions Grows
- Minnesota Gubernatorial Candidate Running on a Platform of Tax Hikes
Thursday, March 11, 2010
- Michigan Jobs Ain't What They Used To Be...Unless You Work For The Government
- ATR and CFA Support Earmark Moratorium
- Voter Fraud in the Name of Tax Hikes
- Ballooning Deficits in Greece Foreshadowing Future for the U.S.? (ASA Site »)
- Green Jobs FAIL
- The Evergreen Tax and Fee Spree
- ATR Staffer Testifies Before U.S. House Energy & Commerce Select Committee
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
- The endemic rot in government run health care
- The Debt Panel's 800-lb. Gorilla: Why Andy Stern Stands Out
- The Left Agree: Obamacare Ushers In Their Radical Ideological Agenda
- We Ought Focus On Cutting Taxes & Spending, Not Deficits
- The Debt Panel's 800-lb. Gorilla (AWF Site »)
-
Does the Obamacare Investment Surtax
Apply to Capital Gains? - ATR Urges Opposition to Sen. Isakson Pension Bailout
- Taxpayers to Legislators: Clean Virginia Budget of Taxes
- ATR Supports the Georgia JOBS Act
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
- ATR Urges Utah Governor Herbert to Veto Tax Increase
- More on the VAT
- Public Sector Jobs
- How 550,000 jobs were destroyed by the minimum wage hike
- How Obamacare Will Hurt Poor Women & Children Most
- Federal Workers Make $11,000 More Than Private Sector Workers, and There’s More of Them (AWF Site »)
Monday, March 8, 2010
- Legislation Introduced to Put Ronald Reagan on the $50 Bill
- Pledge Signer Wins Illinois Republican Gubernatorial Primary
- "Net Neutrality" To Kill Jobs
- NY Supreme Court Votes to Evict Residents and Close Businesses (PRA Site »)
- California US Senate Candidates Square Off in First Debate
Friday, March 5, 2010
- ATR and CFA Support the Spending Limit Amendment
- Utah Representative Breaks Tax Pledge
- AWF Will Rate Vote on House Jobs Bill (AWF Site »)
- Energy Tax Hike Series: Use it or Lose it Tax
Thursday, March 4, 2010
- The reliability of spending "estimates"
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Costs of Cap-and-Trade for Your Family
From Brian M. Johnson & The Heritage Foundation on Friday, June 26, 2009 11:56 AMAlthough proponents of the bill are pointing to grossly underestimated and incorrect costs, the reality is when all the tax impacts have been added up, the average per-family-of-four costs rise by $2,979 per year. In the year 2035 alone, the cost is $4,609. And the costs per family for the whole energy tax aggregated from 2012 to 2035 are $71,493.
But on second thought, cap and trade is much more than that.
It Kills Jobs: Over the 2012-2035 timeline, job losses average over 1.1 million. By 2035, a projected 2.5 million jobs are lost below the baseline (without a cap and trade bill). Particularly hit hard are sectors of the economy that are very energy-intensive: Manufacturers, farmers, construction, machinery, electrical equipment and appliances, transportation, textiles, paper products, chemicals, plastics and rubbers, and retail trade would face staggering employment losses as a result of Waxman-Markey. It’s worth noting the job losses come after accounting for the green jobs policymakers are so adamant about creating. But don’t worry because the architects of the bill built in unemployment insurance; too bad it will only help 1.5% of those losing their jobs from the bill.
It Destroys Our Economy: Just about everything we do and produce uses energy. As energy prices increase, those costs will be passed onto the consumer and reflected in the higher prices we pay for products. Higher energy prices will cause reduced income, less production and an economy that falls way short of its potential. The average Gross Domestic Product (GDP) lost is $393 billion, hitting a high of $662 billion in 2035. From 2012-2035, the accumulated GDP lost is $9.4 trillion. The negative economic impacts accumulate, and the national debt is no exception. The increase in family-of-four debt, solely because of Waxman-Markey, hits an almost unbelievable $114,915 by 2035.
It Provides Red Meat for Lobbyists: Businesses, knowing very well this would impose a severe cost on their bottom line, sent their lobbyists to Washington to protect them. And it worked. Most of the allowances (the right to emit carbon dioxide) have been promised to industry, meaning less money will be rebated back to the consumer. Free allowances do not lower the costs of Waxman-Markey; they just shift them around. In other words, every day Americans are going to be footing the bill. Although the government awarded handouts to businesses, the carbon dioxide reduction targets are still there, and the way they will be met is by raising the price of energy and thereby inflicting more economic pain. Prices have to go up enough to force people to use less energy, and so if anyone is bought off with free allowances, the costs for everyone else are that much higher.
There’s one thing the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill doesn’t d Work. All of the above-mentioned costs accrue in the first 25 years of a 90-year program that, as calculated by climatologists, will lower temperatures by only hundredths of a degree Celsius in 2050 and no more than two-tenths of a degree Celsius at the end of the century. In the name of saving the planet for future generations, Waxman-Markey does not sound like a great deal: Millions of lost jobs, trillions of lost income, 50-90 percent higher energy prices, and stunning increases in the national debt, all for undetectable changes in world temperature. Who’s buying that?
Related Articles
Interior Department Hides Data, Pushes Back Offshore Drilling Plan - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 5:49 PM
Study: Health Care Legislation Will Cost up to 700,000 Jobs by 2019 - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 10:21 AM
Comprehensive List of Tax Hikes in Government Health Bill to be Voted on by House - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 9:05 AM
How the FCC Plans to Tax the Internet - Tuesday, March 16, 2010 3:42 PM
ATRF Analysis: The Importance of International Tax Competition - Monday, March 15, 2010 11:24 AM













Comments
I called my representative, Brad Sherman, and told his office that if he supported this bill that my wife and I would never vote for him or and Democrat representing our district. We are both registered Democrats but Rep. Sherman still decided to vote for the bill even though almost all calls to his office were like mine. Do these people even listen or are we wasting our time until we can vote them all out?
>> Ray West Monday, June 29, 2009 4:18 PM
Dear Ray, I also tried to contact Brad Sherman, through email, and told him that I'm not happy with his Cap and Trade vote and would be voting against him when he is up for his next re-election. The area that he represents, predominantly the San Fernando Valley, cannot afford the restrictions and tax burdens that this bill will bring down upon businesses and every day people like you and me. I keep wondering what Mr. Sherman was promised politically if he voted yes on the bill. He should be ashamed of himself.
>> Mike Wednesday, July 1, 2009 12:34 PM
Here's what I need to know.Am I being radical in thinking CAP AND TRADE totally discriminates against large families (in other words-more kids more taxes because of drain on the environment)...I also have adopted 4 kids. If families choose to add orphans to their family are we being financially penalized? Is this just another item that will discourage women to choose life when they have an unplanned pregnancy (ie...too much tax)...in that way are we heading toward a system similar to CHINA where people are taxed waaaayyy more when they have more children..
>> Deanna Falchook Friday, July 3, 2009 2:19 PM