Sdi 2010 Midterms Impacts Updates
Cap and Trade-Can Pass Next Year
Download 0.56 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Economy Internal Link Ext
Cap and Trade-Can Pass Next YearDems can do it next year-Feistein agrees BusinessWeek 6-11 http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-11/u-s-democrats-split-in-senate-vote-on-agency-s-carbon-rules.html “We need to pass a cap-and-trade bill,” Senator Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, said after the vote on Murkowski’s measure. “I think it can certainly get passed next year; it can’t this year.” Under cap-and-trade, the government issues a declining number of carbon dioxide allowances that power plants, factories and oil refineries buy and sell. Cap-and-trade legislation that narrowly passed the House last year stalled in the Senate. Senators John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, released a revamped cap- and-trade bill last month and are lobbying with Obama’s help to get the new carbon-pricing proposal included in energy legislation that may get a vote as early as July. ‘Much Different’ Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, the Democrats’ chief vote-counter, said after yesterday’s vote “the Senate is likely to consider legislation much different than the House” cap-and- trade bill. The bill to be considered next month will “deal with energy and clean-energy jobs,” Durbin said. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters he’ll wait for a meeting with Democrats next week before deciding what should be in next month’s energy legislation, although it won’t be branded as “cap-and-trade.” “We don’t use the word cap-and-trade; that’s something that’s been deleted from my dictionary,” Reid said. “Carbon pricing is something we’re talking about.” Reid said this week he is weighing whether to add the carbon caps in Kerry and Lieberman’s legislation to a bill approved by the Senate energy committee last year that ramps up electricity generation from renewable sources such as wind farms and sets new energy-efficiency standards. Six Democrats It usually takes 60 out of 100 votes to pass major legislation through the Senate. Democrats hold 59 seats in the chamber, meaning the support of at least one Republican is needed for most bills to pass. Yesterday all 41 Republicans voted against the EPA’s proposed carbon regulations. 2NC Economy Impact Cap and Trade Key to the Economy-jobs Brad Johnson, 4-26-2010, “Report: Smart Cap And Trade Will Boost Growth, Create 2.8 Million Jobs, And Cut Carbon Pollution”, Masters Degree in Geosciences for MIT http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/04/26/climate-strategies-jobs/ A new macroeconomic analysis of green economic policies finds that cutting global warming pollution will make the economy grow faster. The Center for Climate Strategies (CCS), building upon analysis they did of state-level climate plans for the National Governors Association, analyzed the economic and environmental impact of legislation in line with the planned Kerry-Graham-Lieberman framework. As long as state-level policies are boosted instead of pre-empted, CCS found that previous economic analyses by federal agencies and industry groups are wrong. This CCS analysis finds that instead of slowing the economy, household wealth and jobs will grow faster in a green economy. Carbon limits and efficiency-focused policies would have a net positive employment impact of 2.8 million jobs and expand the economy by $154.7 billion by 2020, while US emissions are cut to 27 percent below 1990 levels — if strong standards are set: The modeled job creation is consistent with the findings of Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts, which used an input-output model to find that a green economy would create 1.7 million new jobs. The center looked at three different policy scenarios, using the industry-standard REMI Policy Insight PI+ macroeconomic model: – Strong local, state and federal implementation of green economic policies like green building codes and smart growth – These strong policies combined with a federal cap-and-trade system and coupled fuel fee to guarantee emissions reductions of 27 percent below 1990 levels by 2010 – Scaled-back implementation of the policies and cap-and-trade system in line with President Obama’s goal of six percent below 1990 levels, similar to the Kerry-Graham-Lieberman bill soon to be considered The cap-and-trade system modeled uses full auction of permits and 75 percent of proceeds going directly back to consumers and 25 percent going to technology investments. No proceeds are dedicated to deficit reduction, as none is needed — a faster-growing economy will increase other tax receipts. In every single scenario, policies that cut waste and save money by eliminating market failures predominate, making the U.S. economy a more efficient free market and accelerating job growth and household wealth. The report finds that stronger environmental targets and standards deliver greater economic benefits — even if the tremendous benefits of reducing pollution have for health and environmental costs are ignored. The 23 recommended climate strategies range the gamut from agriculture, energy supply, electricity use, to transportation. These strategies — most of which save money — combined can achieve major carbon pollution reductions: This is what true all-of-the-above energy policy looks like. The suite of recommended policies coming from the consultants to the Center for Climate Strategies report — the stakeholders in local and state governments, businesses, and energy users — must be taken as a top priority, even if they don’t have an army of lobbyists to promote this green economic agenda. The current level of ambition in Washington is not only insufficient to mitigate the damages of global warming, it is leaving hundreds of thousands of jobs on the table. Economy Internal Link ExtCap and Trade helps the economy-auction system means it protects consumers and encourages job growth Revesz and Livermore 3-10-2009 “Obama's Carbon Cap-and-Trade Plan Can Boost Growth” Richard L. Revesz is the dean of New York University School of Law, and Michael A. Livermore is the executive director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law. They are the authors of Retaking Rationality: How Cost-Benefit Analysis Can Better Protect the Environment and Our Health (Oxford University Press, 2008). http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/mar2009/db20090310_825431.htm President Barack Obama hits three nails on the head with his plan to cap carbon emissions: weaning us off fossil fuels, spurring a wave of investment and job creation, and putting cash in the pockets of Americans who most need it. In his budget, Obama included a "cap-and-refund" proposal that puts a strict limit on pollution that causes global warming and uses a permit auction to make large companies pay for the right to pollute. The cap on emissions will increase the price of fossil-fuel-based energy to encourage efficiency and new technologies. To protect consumers from rising prices, Obama's plan refunds the revenue from the auctions directly to the American people through a tax credit. The point of a carbon cap is to make energy efficiency and renewable energy sources more competitive by removing hidden subsidies for dirty energy such as coal. Pollution from fossil-fuel-based energy is known to impose important external costs, from health impacts today to climate change risks tomorrow. By raising the price of carbon emissions, a cap will create incentives for clean energy, efficiency, and conservation. Sparing Consumer Electricity Costs Leveling the playing field by forcing fossil-fuel prices to reflect their true cost will spur a wave of clean-energy investment: research and development in new technologies, new factories to produce solar panels and wind turbines, and energy-efficiency retrofits of commercial and residential real estate. That means jobs, and lots of them. While some businesses that rely on dirty energy will be hurt, many others will thrive in the clean-energy economy. Most carbon cap plans are set up to fail because they reward energy companies with permit giveaways and fail to compensate consumers for increased electricity bills. One such proposal hit the Senate floor last year, only to collapse under the weight of too much spending and not enough protection for the middle class. Obama's cap-and-refund plan avoids these mistakes. As stated clearly by Peter Orszag, President Obama's budget director, giving away the permits would be nothing more than "the largest corporate welfare program that has ever been enacted in the history of the United States." A cap is going to increase the relative cost of dirty energy whether permits are given away or auctioned because companies will have to use permits they could otherwise have sold in the market. Either way, in deregulated markets, energy companies will pass those costs to consumers. Giving away permits doesn't help consumers; it just transfers wealth to utility companies. The exception is in regulated energy markets, where consumers would have to count on utility regulators to protect their interests. Add Nonworkers to the Refund Flow Just as important, almost all of the revenue from the permit auction is returned to the American public, recycling revenue directly into the U.S. economy and protecting consumers. Although prices for energy and energy-intensive goods are likely to rise, the refund can make up and even exceed the additional expenses for most Americans. As an added bonus, since lower-income Americans tend to spend new disposable income quickly—and they benefit the most under a tax-and-refund plan—we can actually expect a jump in consumer spending. The President's budget is only the very beginning of this process. There are ways to improve it and to involve more Americans. Under the President's plan, the refunds are distributed by extending the Making Work Pay tax credit, which applies to 95% of working Americans. If all, or nearly all, of the revenue from an auction is directly refunded, most Americans will receive more from the refund than they pay in increased energy prices. Unfortunately, this tax credit would not reach nonworkers, including retirees, people on disability, and the unemployed. Because these populations are among the most vulnerable, the refund should take them into account. As the cap declines, the auction revenue will actually increase, and a plan should be made to distribute the additional funds directly to the American public. A Cleaner, Healthier Economy These are important issues, but they deal with how to implement what is a genuinely transformative policy for this country. Right away, the President's proposal will create new investment incentives and get cash into the pockets of working Americans. In the future, as we adjust to a new green economy, the cap will be lowered, generating even greater revenue that will be distributed to the U.S. public. The results of America's fossil-fuel addiction are clear: We send billions overseas for foreign oil, muck up the environment with coal pollution, and stunt economic development. Breaking that addiction will cause withdrawal symptoms for some, but it is necessary to build a cleaner, healthier economy for all. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.56 Mb. Share with your friends:
|