Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) said that if Congress didn’t vote for Waxman-Markey, EPA would regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act — i.e., with little consideration for economics.
How about a third option — no CO2 regulation at all?
Rep. Rick Boucher (D-VA) said that if Congress didn’t vote for Waxman-Markey, EPA would regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act — i.e., with little consideration for economics.
How about a third option — no CO2 regulation at all?
I say call their bluff.
Regardless of how they vote election to election the American public has proven two things time and time again:
They aren’t buying AGW
They like buying lots of low cost consumer goods
Waxman, Markey et al would be wise to consider that you don’t strong arm the mob. Acknowledging the facts above, I don’t see our representatives signing us up for this taxathon. So let the dems try to strongarm everyone through use of the EPA. Such an act would be viewed as reactionary and tactical and thus judged more harshly than the do-gooder perception that Waxman Markey supporters are buying into. And the consequences on businesses and consumers would shake the foundations of support for democrats everywhere, as alienated constituents return the favor. Fine by me.
As I see it, calling bluffs and upping the ante is the best plan to drive this whole issue to implosion. A longer, more visible fight will inevitably lead to more unanswerable questions about the costs to consumers versus the benefits.
On the flip side, it will be a major failure for Republicans if this bill passes. Still a good thing as I see it though. The Libertarian Party has long preached belief in completely eliminating the EPA. The planets will align for them should either manifestation of CO2 taxation come to pass. Because ain’t nobody gonna like it…