Democrats and global warming revenue tricks

Ed Rogers:
...
My favorite quote from the “news analysis” is, “air travel emissions now account for only about 5 percent of warming.” What a ridiculous statement. Five percent of warming? Not only has the New York Times determined how much the planet has warmed, they’re even able to assign percentages to the offending behaviors.

The president’s inaugural address has brought this issue back to the center of the political stage in the United States. The Democrats in Congress and the president now face the burden of saying who they will charge and what burdens they will create in exchange for … something. We’re about to see where ideology and political practicality collide. There is no feasible scenario where Americans could do anything to control the world’s climate. The only question is, how much are we going to pay and what is that amount supposed to get us?

I’ve been watching polling on this issue for several years, and it’s clear that while voters can be concerned about global warming, no one is willing to bear any new cost as a result of their concern. And no one thinks that government has any real solutions. Yet according to the president, it will be a major priority of his during the next four years. It all boils down to higher prices — for air travel, home electricity, shipping, etc.

Republicans can win on this issue if we are thoughtful advocates of mitigation and technological solutions. Let the Democrats advocate for lifestyle changes, higher costs and higher taxes. The president has put the issue in play for 2014. It will be useful for Speaker John Boehner to let there be roll call votes on just about any measure the Democrats want to offer. Let’s create a record of what the Democrats are willing to vote for vs. what they want to talk about at cocktail parties, campus forums and think tank seminars.
Democrats want to use global warming as an excuse to charge you more for almost everything since their charges would be applied to the use of energy.  For paying more, you get nothing other than an incentive to use less of what?  Energy? Come on.  Rogers is right.  We should make the Democrats vote on the President's proposal as often as possible.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains

James Robbins: ... Bin Laden suggests that President Bush should allow Zarqawi’s body to be returned to his family in Jordan, but this is a matter that is up to the Jordanian government, which so far has not shown much interest in facilitating a homecoming. Bin Laden mocks King Abdullah II, calling him a Coalition minion, and asking “w hat scares you about Abu Musab after he’s dead? You know that his funeral, if allowed to happen, would be a huge funeral showing the extent of sympathy with the mujahedin.” A large crowd would definitely turn out, though most people would be on hand to demonstrate their anger and disgust. Last November’s hotel bombings in Amman , masterminded by Zarqawi, are still fresh in people’s memory, and mentioning them to Jordanians has the same visceral impact as memory of the 9/11 attacks does here. Jordan has adopted a zero-tolerance policy towards those who choose to mourn the country’s least favorite son, and four opposition members of parliament who paid con
Read more