What Cap and Trade Reform Means to US Taxpayers

American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009monthly utilities, and energy companies will likely
Earlier this summer, the United States House ofhave to reduce their work forces to reduce
Representatives passed H.R.2454, the Americanexpenses. In Great Britain, they have a cap and
Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, whichtrade system in place and the average family
claims to "create clean energy jobs, achievepays an estimated $1,300 per year for it.
energy independence, and reduce global warmingHowever, here in the United State experts are
pollution and transition to a clean energypredicting that the cost could end up being more
economy." However, the bill has become quitelike $1,800.
controversial as it includes a cap and trade "globalExcessive Handouts
warming reduction plan" that aims to reduceAnother popular criticism of the American Clean
greenhouse gas emissions by 17% before theEnergy and Security Act of 2009 is the amount
year 2020. It also includes new requirements forof handouts for Congress members to please
utility companies regarding carbon technology,their constituents. The bill is also stuffed with
incentives for energy efficient homes andprovisions that are favorable to companies that
buildings, as well as grants for new "green" jobs.lobbied for the bill. According to the Center for
Highly Controversial LegislationPublic Integrity, over 2,300 different lobbyists
As with most of the recent legislation coming outworked on the bill, which resulted on "provisions
of Congress, H.R.2454 has quickly become veryfor portable spas and technical standards for
controversial. Opponents claim that the nearlyhot-food-holders within the body of the bill." All of
1,300 page bill was quickly put together. They alsothese handouts result in direct costs to the
point to its slim 219 to 212 vote passage as a badaverage taxpayer.
sign. Many experts assert that the bill will do littleFunding for Health Care Reform
to actually help the environment, and is mostly aAs Joe Walsh pointed out in an article on Reuters,
way to increase Federal revenue. Currently, onlymany experts are predicting that cap and trade
about 15% of the country's pollution permits aretaxes could be used to help offset the cost of
being auctioned off, the rest are just being givenhealth care reform. Why? "Because with all
away. The new cap and trade legislation makescurrently proposed {health care reform} bills
great efforts to convert the system to becomeestimated to expand deficits even as Obama
entirely auction based. That way the Governmentpledges not to sign a bill that increases them by
can take more control in auctioning off permitsso much as a 'dime,' ever, he will need carbon
and reap profits from energy companies, who willcash to pay for Americans' health care."
still be allowed to pollute - but will just be payingWalsh continues to explain that proponents of cap
more to do so.and trade restrictions and working with Senators
Direct Cost to Taxpayersto create a bill that would not include an
Like I explained in my television segment theimmediate public option, but one that could
other day, these charges to energy companiesbecome available down the road once funding was
will be passed down directly to Americanavailable. Analysts predict that changing cap and
taxpayers. Let's take a step back and considertrade restrictions to help fund a future public
the domino effect: when businesses have lessoption could be an easy way to get the health
revenue because of higher taxes, they are goingcare reform bill passed without instant tax
to have to make cuts elsewhere. This meansincreases on the average American taxpayer.
consumers will end up paying more for their