Dingell will propose carbon tax, predicts Americans will not go for it
Filed under: Legislation and Policy
Amid all the squabbling about how high to raise fuel economy standards and in what time frame, no one has been willing to step up to the plate and do the one thing that would make the standards a moot point. No one has been willing to propose taxes that would raise the price of fuel to a level that would force Americans to face the true cost of their energy choices. Until now that is and amazingly enough it's coming from a corner you might not expect. Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) will introduce a carbon tax that, if implemented, would make fossil fuels substantially more expensive in relation to other choices such as wind, solar, and biofuels. If this were done people would naturally clamor for high efficiency vehicles without CAFE standards. Dingell is only doing this to try and prove the point that Americans will not accept paying the true of their fuels. The problem with this is that Americans do not have a choice, they will ultimately end up paying whether through a carbon tax or increased military spending to try and maintain a supply of Middle East crude. Democrats need to do this and tie it to income tax reductions on the people who will be affected most by the carbon tax, the lower and middle income taxpayers. Americans need to learn that they cannot continue their profligate use of fossil fuels without paying the tab. Whether you make the argument from an environmental or national security standpoint both are equally valid and particularly pressing.
[Source: New York Times]












Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-08-2007 @ 2:25PM
mikeinBuilding7 said...
The Auto Industry should be pressing REPUBLICANS for Carbon Tax Proposals. They're the ones who've turned Fiscal and Energy Mismanagement into a Crooks game. They should be the ones to fix it.
Reply
7-08-2007 @ 6:41PM
bioburner said...
I would gladdly pay the carbon tax as opposed to spending more tax dollars to fund a military operations in the middle east. How much blood is the oil worth?
I'm suprised to see a Republican talking about introducing this legeslation. Lets see if he actually does it!!!
Reply
7-08-2007 @ 7:00PM
Tony Belding said...
I believe global warming is a huge scam based on a mass delusion. Dingell is doing everyone a favor by spelling out the heavy costs we'll have to pay to solve a "crisis" that, in all likelihood, does not even exist.
Reply
7-08-2007 @ 8:39PM
Chris said...
^?
I guess it's fine to bury your head in the sand. The rest of us will try to work towards a solution.
And I love when people don't "believe" in things. Like my friend who doesn't believe whites are the statistical majority in the country (no matter what the census says), or my other friend who doesn't believe in evolution. I like to tell them that I don't believe in gravity, but if I jump off a cliff, gravity doesn't care.
Reply
7-09-2007 @ 8:59AM
Phil L. said...
It looks like any point Dingell is trying to make will be lost in the shuffle as Pelosi learns to flex her political clout...
Reply
7-09-2007 @ 9:42AM
jcwinnie said...
Detroit, as represented by the Democrat from Michigan, is betting that Congress is incapable of doing the right thing. Their extra insurance is the certatintly of a Oily Administration veto.
It would take our "representatives" going against their campaign contributors and enacting globally responsible legislation AND throwing the President and Vice President in a federal country club. (Scooter could have visitation privileges).
Anybody got a line from Vegas on what the odds of that happening would be?
Reply
7-09-2007 @ 12:28PM
Tony Belding said...
Thanks a whole heap for lumping me in with Creationists, Chris. :P
Personally, I tend to put Global Warming in the same category with Creationism -- they are both symptoms of poor science education and disrespect for the scientific method. The environmental movement today is like a religious cult with Al Gore as their Prophet of the End Times, and excommunication as the standard punishment for heretics.
Many climate scientists are highly doubtful about global warming. But unfortunately, you don't get grant money by discovering that global warming isn't happening. Instead you get accused of being a puppet of Big Oil, and you don't get invited to dinner parties anymore. Even in spite of that, some of them are speaking out. Eventually the truth will come out, but I wonder how much damage will be done before then?
Reply
7-09-2007 @ 1:18PM
Thomas said...
What sort of damage do you forsee? Is your worst case scenario a world full of efficient, zero emmisions monsters? I'm quaking.
Reply