Home » cap and trade
You are browsing entries tagged with “cap and trade”
President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.
That’s a Harvard University study’s estimate of the per-gallon price of the president’s global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.
So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?
Good question, because such measures wouldn’t do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.
The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s now-famous words, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste — and what I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”
June 18th, 2010 | Posted in Web-Only Content | Read More »
Climate Bill: Sen. Joe Lieberman believes American households are “willing to pay less than $1″ a day to stop global warming. The Connecticut independent needs a lesson in the history of government program costs.
Lieberman and Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts introduced in May a nearly 1,000-page climate bill they say is necessary for cutting the man-made carbon dioxide emissions they believe are warming the earth. Their goal, through the legislation’s cap-and-trade components, is to reduce CO2 emissions 17% below 2005 levels 10 years from now by setting prices on carbon.
June 17th, 2010 | Posted in Web-Only Content | Read More »
For all his reputation as the nation’s Top Talker, Barack Obama took his sweet time giving a maiden Oval Office address to the country. And waiting another nearly 60 days to speak nationally about the oil spill that’s become the worst environmental disaster in the nation’s history.
Obama, the first modern president to pass his first full year in office without addressing the country from his historic desk, had the setting right. Just back from a day-and-a-half on the gulf coast listening, reassuring, talking tourism, eating seafood. He wore the proper suit, had the requisite flags and family photos in the background.
June 16th, 2010 | Posted in Web-Only Content | Read More »
The vote today in the Senate is being dubbed a victory against Cap and Trade. On the surface the vote was simply one to determine who had the rightful authority, if any, to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. The Obama Administration is borderline obsessed with derailing any traditional Constitutional legislative rules.
The vote today in the Senate was an attempt to prevent the Obama Administration’s end runaround through the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. Regulation of gases, which are exhaled by the processes of life by the way, is clearly not a mandated power in the Constitution and the Congress has never granted themselves the authority. Despite some misconceptions floating out there, the Clear Air Act gave the government the no power over carbon dioxide. This act was to reduce smog and air pollutants hazardous to human health.
To get around this technicality, for the first time in human history an essential component of all life, carbon dioxide was declared a poisonous gas hazardous to your health by the EPA, bypassing any need for debate or laws passed by a legislative body of elected officials. Bureaucrats made the call once again. Plant food was decreed through authoritarian fiat to be a deadly toxin. Today was a minor victory against the malicious power grabbing central government, but it is far from the end of their attempts to find schemes to tax, control and turn into another derivatives trading pyramid the lifegiving gas of carbon dioxide.
June 10th, 2010 | Posted in Web-Only Content | Read More »
Statement by Congressman Ron Paul before the US House of Representatives, June 4, 2009.
Madam Speaker, before voting on the “cap-and-trade” legislation, my colleagues should consider the views expressed in the following petition that has been signed by 31,478 American scientists:
“We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
“There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
“Circulated through the mail by a distinguished group of American physical scientists and supported by a definitive review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature, this may be the strongest and most widely supported statement on this subject that has been made by the scientific community. A state-by-state listing of the signers, which include 9,029 men and women with PhD degrees, a listing of their academic specialties, and a peer-reviewed summary of the science on this subject are available at www.petitionproject.org. The peer-reviewed summary, “Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide” by A. B. Robinson, N. E. Robinson, and W. Soon includes 132 references to the scientific literature and was circulated with the petition.
Read more.
July 2nd, 2009 | Posted in Print Edition | Read More »
Investor’s Business Daily
Global Warming: At the cap-and-trade hearings, it was revealed that not everyone will suffer from this growth-killing energy tax. A congresswoman wanted to know why sea levels aren’t rising but Gore’s bank account is.
When Gore left office in January 2001, he was said to have a net worth in the neighborhood of $2 million. A mere eight years later, estimates are that he is now worth about $100 million. It seems it’s easy being green, at least for some.
Gore has his lectures and speeches, his books, a hit movie and Oscar, and a Nobel Prize. But Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., was curious about how a man dedicated to saving the planet could get so wealthy so quickly. She sought out investment advice we all could use in a shaky economy.
Al Gore joined the venture capital group Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers September of 2007. On May 1, 2008, the firm announced a $500 million investment in maturing green technology firms called the Green Growth Fund.
Gore was the star witness at the hearings on cap-and- trade legislation before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Blackburn asked Gore about Kleiner-Perkins, noting that at last count they “have invested about a billion dollars invested in 40 companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation that we are discussing here today.”
Blackburn then asked the $100 million question: “Is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?” Gore gave the stock answer that “the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it but every penny that I have made I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge.”
Gore, while speaking at a conference in Monterey, Calif., admitted to having “a stake” in green investments that he recommended attendees put money in rather than “subprime carbon assets” such as tar sands and shale oil.
Read more.
May 5th, 2009 | Posted in Print Edition | Read More »
-
Designed by