This week in the U.S. Senate, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Change Bill will be up for consideration. Climate Change is code speak to cover for the ever-so popular term ”global warming” that Al Gore created through “An Inconvenient Truth.” Now, I admit that we are witnessing the effects of climate change, but they are minimal compared to previous changes. The Earth is supposed to change yearly, so why does there need to be so much drama?
Lieberman-Warner would threaten our economy by raising energy costs for American families who are already struggling due to the already rising costs of fuel. At National Review, Ben Lieberman talks about the myths of this bill. Basically, when the L-W advocates say this is not going to be costly, the very truth is that this bill is just another way to tax Americans to death on a commodity that we rely on. Another good point made through this article is that this bill will address climate change, and the fact is it might affect a tiny bit.
Additionally, another thing that this bill highlights is that the cap and trade proposal will be a great help. However, The Wall Street Journal says that “the “cap and spend” policy is different from “cap and trade” policies of the past because “to ease the pain and allow for economic adjustment, the bill would dole out ‘allowances’ under the cap that would stand for the right to emit greenhouse gases” after which “the allowances will be auctioned off to covered businesses, which means imposing an upfront tax before the trade half of cap and trade even begins. It also means a gigantic revenue windfall for Congress.”
Hmm, sounds like another way the government wants to drag more money away from Americans. L-W is just a political exercise to keep special interest groups happy going into the Presidential election and pave the way for passage in 2009. California is just living proof of how “cap and spend” policies can be detrimental to the economy. So, why would we want to pass similar legislation at a national level?