Why Cap and Trade and Will it Stop There?

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is determined to get the Waxman-Markey energy tax bill, otherwise known as the Cape and Trade energy bill, to the floor of the House and passed as soon as possible. The main reason for a rush to get this bill passed and the cap and trade program in operation is because of President Obama's agenda (he needs the tax revenues to fund his other big spending priorities). The programs Obama wishes to establish and fund are listed in the bill, but you usually have to look at the small print to see it. For instance:

Footnote 5 of Table S-6 starts off "Shown here are those proceeds from auctioning emission allowances that are reserved for clean energy technology initiatives and to compensate families through the Making Work Pay tax cut." This is in reference to "Total, climate revenues" of $645,711,000,000 which are to come from the President's cap-and-trade restrictions on carbon dioxide.

Just how is this cap and trade supposed to work? Put simply, the government will set up a Number Of Credits representing the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Then industries who emit these global warming gases will be required to purchase "credits" based on the number of tons their industry puts out into the atmosphere, or pollutes the atmosphere. They do this purchasing at auction. The trade part comes in if an industry is unable or does not purchase enough credits to put out a given number of pollutants in the atmosphere then they can trade (or purchase) credits from other industries.

This is much like the plan agreed upon at the Kyoto Protocol of 1997 that was to be a binding agreement between the countries of the world to reduce atmospheric pollution. All the countries in the world would be given a pollution allowance. The countries who polluted more than their share would purchase allowances from countries who did not pollute as much. It was and is a good plan if all countries would sign on. The theory being that while countries are purchasing pollution allowances from less developed countries part of the price would be to help these countries develop by developing and installing cleaner sources of energy and "testing" them in these less developed countries. Eventually in this way the whole planet would be using clean energy sources. The only thing is that as of January 2009 only 183 countries had ratified this treaty and the heaviest polluters, of which the United States is one, have not signed on.

President Obama's plan is to raise revenue from the sale of these credits as I stated, and as candidate Obama stated tax plan for the federal government and way of getting the funding needed to fund his new entitlement programs. It will also be an enormous cost to the consumers as companies pass their costs along. I have read estimates from so many sources on the possible extra costs per family and they seem to range from $1500. to $2200. per year just in added costs of electricity. The Heritage Foundation and a professor at MIT suggest the real cost will be closer to $4500. per family annually and have an impact on almost 900,000 jobs. But no one can really foresee these things and in most cases I have found the estimates to be much lower than the actuality.

I really can see this program as being beneficial to the country even at the enormous initial costs in that it will cause industries to do more to lower their need for pollution credits and I certainly am all for getting away from the use of filthy fossil fuels. If the federal government would then stop there an allow industry and the economy to adjust. However this is not the case as the Obama government is also, and at the same time, imposing a whole batch of restraints and new taxes on business and industry. These restraints can only be to gain more control over industry and business while the extra taxes are to get the funding needed for the socialist programs he and is administration wish to use to make the population more and more dependent on government for everything. There is an old saying, "don't bite the hand that feeds you." and a dependent population will not question the acts of such a government. I have blogged on several of these measures already and will continue to keep my readers up to date as best I can.

As I stated above it is possible that if cap and trade were standing alone business and industry would rise to the occasion and merely pass the costs on to consumers. However with the other heavy taxes and government influences in their affairs. I am afraid this infringement into business will be too much, and more of our American business and industries will simply close their American plants, as many are already doing, and move to other more business friendly countries. This will lead to a serious, perhaps fatal, breakdown of our commercial and social structure. In other words, the destruction of our nation.

If you think this isn't possible for the federal government to infringe upon the operations of private enterprise because it is against the law you would be right. However I would like to point out that President Obama already took it upon himself to fire the CEO of GM. And now GM is owned by the United Auto Workers Union and the US tax payer, and regardless of all the tax payer money poured into GM it is almost assured they will go bankrupt after all. In the financial institutions just two instances: The federal government pressured the Bank of America to make loans to unqualified industries or other failing banks under dire threats of taking over the bank assets if they didn't comply, and the federal government is now refusing to allow banks who took the TARP bail out funds to pay them back so as to get out from under the regulations imposed by their acceptance of these funds. (This strings were attached in the main after the banks had applied for the funds).

Now my question is why would a President of the United States want to take over and control the financial institutions in the nation? One reason may have been given at the G20 Conference of Nations where Obama agreed with several other nations of the European Union to put all financial institutions under an International Regulatory Agency. Congress would have to approve of this of course but if the banks are already under the control of the federal government with Congress's consent it would pretty much be a done deal.

Why then would a President want to destroy the economy of his own country by all but forcing industry to leave the United States by outright taking over the control of industries or by so overburdening companies that they have no choice but to leave?

One answer comes to mind quickly since it has already been voiced by this same President: One World Government. A nation where there is little or no industry and ways of making a living for it's people is a collapsed nation, and a collapsed nation of starving people will agree readily to any plan offered them and sold to them as being their only salvation. Remember the all but chicken Little attitude when President Bush and his Sec. of Treasure Paulson announced the imminent collapse of the financial system, and add an unemployment rate reaching up to 30% of the nation and you have a population willing to grab any straw. That straw: a powerful One World Government offering to "spread the wealth" around the world as President Obama promised (and therefore got elected on the promise) "spreading the wealth" around the country This would have much appeal to the hungry masses.

Sadly, I am reminded of the video of the single Black mother on election night crying "...I now don't have to worry about putting gasinmycar or paying my mortgage" . It is this kind of person who would give up any freedoms to have a nanny state take care of her, or rather, what she believes will be taking care of her. She needs of course to merely watch TV and see how the poor live in countries where the investors, industrialist and business men have been shut down or run out and the government has taken over all. BB

If the above concerns you at all it is possible to do something about it. I urge you, before you do anything else today, to tell your U.S. Representative to vote NO on the American Clean Energy
and Security Act of 2009 (Cap and Trade) You can do this easily at
http://www.cagw.org/site/R?i=qZqtvR7lGOFRa0KQzOrpkw..
The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste - Action Alert