Political Discussions
Cap and Trade Bill
Posted by jhixon2 • 6/26/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: cap bill congress environment
This bill is helping the government stretch its bounds into the peoples life. MOST Americans don't want to have their energy bills raised on average almost $200 a year, but these congressman could care less. The "science" that the Democrats are coming up to pass this bill,is no more than a scare tactic to fool the American people into letting the government seize more power.
To give you an example of the idiocy that has enveloped our Congress, Dennis Kucinich stated that he hopes the bill will help create a carbon free world. It turns out that carbon makes up a majority of our body and not to mention is one of the most abundant elements on the planet.
The whole "science" behind all of this is a complete joke. Just as many scientists deny human cause of global warming as those who support it. But in this case, a select few are trying to force the issue on Americans who really have better things to worry about than this garbage. Not to mention that this will destroy thousands of jobs and will take extra money from citizens that they could instead be investing in the economy. Hopefully Congress will listen to its people and deny this radical bill.
User Comments
-
Did you plan on providing anything but a rhetoric based anti-ecology argument? Like maybe the bill being voted on? Maybe a link to "the science" you seem to hate so much and are basing your position on?-
I am a biology major in college so obviously I don't hate science or the environment. What I do hate is idiocy of people who know absolutely nothing about carbon and claim that we the people need to change our lives to fix this issue that they know nothing about. Just saying.
-
So I'll take that as a no, then?
Alrighty. -
You mean these people?
Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real
www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html
Quotes and links to more information below:
www.blogcatalog.com/politics/discuss/entry/cap-and-trade-bill#comment_10121...
-
-
I take it you support it then and want your energy bill to be raised. Thanks for screwing us all Anok.
-
I can neither support nor reject anything because you haven't provided anything for me to support or reject but your rant about some bill that uses some science you don't like about something rant rant rant rhetoric rhetoric.
Cite your sources, tell us what you are talking about, or shut the fuck up. -
lol!
-
I don't know why you are distraught Anok. The Cap and Trade Bill is all in the news.
-
-
Recent government reports have played down the bill's cost: An EPA study said it might cost an average family between $80 and $111 per year. The Congressional Budget Office's estimate was $175 per household.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062602622_2....
So it MIGHT cost between $7 and $15 a month. -
There's a lot more than just cap-and-trade in the bill:
The energy bill before the House will finally create a set of incentives that will spark a clean energy transformation of our economy. It will spur the development of low-carbon sources of energy -- everything from wind, solar, and geothermal power to safe nuclear energy and cleaner coal. It will spur new energy savings like the efficient windows and other materials that reduce heating costs in the winter and cooling costs in the summer.
And most importantly, it will make possible the creation of millions of new jobs. Now, make no mistake -- this is a jobs bill. We're already seeing why this is true in the clean energy investments we're making through the Recovery Act. In California, 3,000 people will be employed to build a new solar plant that will create 1,000 jobs. In Michigan, investments in wind turbines and wind technology is expected to create over, 2,600 jobs. In Florida, three new solar projects are expected to employ 1,400 people.
The list goes on and on, but the point is this: This legislation will finally make clean energy the profitable kind of energy. That will lead to the creation of new businesses and entire new industries. And that will lead to American jobs that pay well and can't be outsourced.
www.whitehouse.gov/blog/A-Historic-Energy-Bill/
9/11 and the war in Iraq were the result of our dependency on oil -- primarily the oil in the Middle East. This will lessen our dependency on oil and will make our country safer as a result.
All the lies and propaganda coming out of right-wingers makes you wonder why they hate our country so much.-
Its from whitehouse.gov!!!! are you that stupid. What do you think they are going to put on the site? "This new bill will destroy millions of jobs". Knowing Obama I will highly doubt that. No satijournal i love my country and people like you in congress are destroying it with bills like this. I'm sorry but your just wrong.
-
When you call someone stupid, you really should use the right version of "you're."
That said, it seems like you love the Republican party more than you love your country. A LOT more. -
9/11 was because we depend on foreign oil? You've GOT to be kidding me. -
Sati please shutup. You write cartoons and everything you say is virtually a cartoon in word form. Your a joke.
-
-
We are made out of CO2? This is more serious than I thought (O_O)-
Buwahahahahahahaha LOLLOL
Good catch -
If you read it I said CARBON which you and I are made of. (Good catch by me)
-
I'm made out of sunshine and rainbows. -
I'm made out of beanie hats and clown noses, just look at my avatar. sati sent it to me as a present.
cough*cyberstalker*cough -
I'm made out of explicit lyrics
I considered simply arguing that carbon and carbon dioxide were not the same thing... but i figured you could tell us all yourself -
Okay! Who are you and what have you done with Agit8r?? He never takes the high road!!
-
it was just a little temporary lazyness
-
Let's not let it happen again! By the way, see how much sati likes me? He sent me this neat new avatar. I think he drew it himself, but I can't be sure.
-
-
This appears to be the bill... If y'alls want to argue about SOMETHING o_0
www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&sid=cp1117qtxm&refer=&r_n=hr137.111&db_id=...-
This appears to be the bill... If y'alls want to argue about SOMETHING o_0
No it's not. -
no? what is it then?
-
Is that your argument?
-
I have no arguement 'til I see the bill
-
-
I've not kept up on this, but have read some very good arguments either way over the last couple of days. I am still torn.Should it be workedon or should it be send to the fire..haven't decided. Most people I know who are science based have a more "pro but it's far from perfect attitude". I have been reading science blogs and also found some interesting posts on it. Enough to make it quite clear to be a "biology student" really doesn't have much authority on the subject. If you search "cap and trace" in science blogs or even other blogs where the blogger has actually spent some time researching both the politics and the science of it, it helps. It doesn't necessarily make it clearer but it helps you form a more coherent argument one way or the other. -
Here's another perspective on Cap and Trade from consumer advocate and former Green Party Presidential candidate Ralph Nader:
online.wsj.com/article/SB122826696217574539.html-
"Good intentions to limit big polluters in some countries but not others will turn any meaningful cap into Swiss cheese. It can be avoided by relocating existing and new production of various kinds of CO2-emitting industries to jurisdictions with no or virtually no limits. This is known as carbon leakage, and it leads to trade anarchy."
-
-
Cap and Trade, more appropriately Tax and Kill will not create jobs, at least not more than it kills. This is the worst piece of legislation that has ever faced our country.
-
"This is the worst piece of legislation that has ever faced our country."
Were you asleep during the Iraq War Resolution and the Patriot Act. -
Not at all. But tell me, how are those worse than Tax and Kill? Errr, Cap and Trade.
-
Typical right-wing tactic. Give something an ominous name to make it seem bad rather than arguing its pros and cons. Or just insult the other person. Or spin the facts. Or just outright lie. Or regurgitate right-wing talking points and propaganda. Not only is it dishonest, it's lazy, anti-democracy, and un-American.
-
It is Tax and Kill because it taxes CO2 and kills existing jobs in our energy industry. All in the name of saving the planet, when over 31,000 scientists have gone on record saying that man made global warming does not exist.
Can I log your post on your silly Thread of shame? I mean you just called me dishonest, lazy, anti-democratic and un-American. Nah, why bother, I really don't give a rat's behind what you think. -
You are saying "tax and kill" is worse than the Iraq War Resolution which was based on lies and bad intel, directly led to the death of over 4000 service men and women plus many more wounded and is projected to cost the nation between 1 and 3 trillion dollars?
Wow. It must be a bad bill. $200 a year and nobody dies? -
The Iraq war was based on bad intel, I will give you that. Prove it was based on lies before you spout such rhetoric. And when the tax and kill bill becomes law, drives up the price of electricity through the roof, I will ask you then if it is bad. Obama himself said that under his cap and trade plan, - and I quote - "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."
So, yeah. I think it is bad and I think that the implications of it will be far reaching. The Congress has a tendency to stuff so much garbage into bills right before they are voted on that one never knows what might become law.
For instance in H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (aka tax and kill) did you know that the government wants to put you on a smart grid that will decide whether or not you get to use certain things, like ANY ELECTRICAL APPLIANCE. They even want to regulate the usages of hot tubs.
"(5) SMART GRID CAPABILITY-
(A) Until the Secretary promulgates criteria under subparagraph (B), the term ‘smart grid capability’ means capability of receiving and interpreting time-of-use pricing and peak-load-shed signals from a utility and--
(i) in the case of a cooking product, reducing a minimum of 20 percent during peak demand as measured by the tested average wattage over the course of a typical operating cycle of the product; or
(ii) in the case of a clothes washer, a refrigerator, a dishwasher, a dryer and a water heater, reducing a minimum of 50 percent during peak demand as measured by the tested average wattage over the course of a typical operating cycle of the product, provided that the typical operating cycle of a refrigerator and a water heater shall be a 24-hour period.
The term ‘portable electric spa’ means a factory-built electric spa or hot tub, supplied with equipment for heating and circulating water.’."
And what is frightening about this bill is that the Congress sets aside no penalties for violation of this law.
"IMPLEMENTATION- The Commission is authorized to adopt rules, regulations, and orders as it deems appropriate to implement this subsection.’."
In other words, they have unlimited power to take action. This is a huge step into our liberties and freedoms and because it is in the name of "saving the planet," everyone just goes along with it.
-
-
The Cap and Trade bill is just another tool for the statist to infiltrate our lives. In this bill, they are going to be able to tell people whether they can have a hot tub. Sheesh. Smart meters on our walls will also come of this, so the Government can tell us we used too much electricity last month, so no matter how hot or cold it is, we have to limit you... Big brother is here.
But for what? Man made global warming does not exist. It is the buzz word of the statist.
"The Romans wrote about growing wine grapes in Britain in the first century," says Avery, "and then it got too cold during the Dark Ages. Ancient tax records show the Britons grew their own wine grapes in the 11th century, during the Medieval Warming, and then it got too cold during the Little Ice Age. It isn't yet warm enough for wine grapes in today's Britain. Wine grapes are among the most accurate and sensitive indicators of temperature and they are telling us about a cycle. They also indicate that today's warming is not unprecedented."
From the same article...
"We have lots of physical evidence for the 1,500-year cycle," says Singer. "Yet we don't have physical evidence that human-emitted CO2 is adding significantly to the natural cycle. The current warming started in 1850, too early to be blamed on industries and autos."
Singer notes that humanity learned of the 1,500-year cycle only recently, from the first Greenland ice cores brought up in 1983. The cycle was too long and moderate to be observed by earlier peoples without thermometers and written records. The Greenland ice cores showed the 1,500-year cycle going back 250,000 years. It raises temperatures at the latitude of New York and Paris by 1-2 degrees C for centuries at a time, more at the North and South Poles, with a global average of 0.5 degrees C. In 1987, the first Antarctic ice core showed the cycle extending back through the last 400,000 years and four Ice Ages-and demonstrated the cycle
was indeed global."
This article is about the book, "Unstoppable Global Warming-Every 1500 Years." The book's authors are well-known climate physicist Fred Singer and Hudson Institute economist Dennis Avery.
www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-09-2006/... -
-
Mmmm.... let's think about this for a minute.
What could be some basic motivations for proponents of global warming?
Science? Desire for cleaner air, safer waters, better health, future for our children??
What could be the basic motivation for opponents of global warming?
Increased business costs cutting into profits? A shift away from an energy product sold by very powerful and influential corporations?
That's my take anyway and I think a lot of other people would come up with similar answers. Two simple questions to think about when you hear the arguments from both sides regarding global warming.
Cap and Trade is certainly a step in the right direction.
Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real
Human-induced global warming is real, according to a recent U.S. survey based on the opinions of 3,146 scientists. However there remains divisions between climatologists and scientists from other areas of earth sciences as to the extent of human responsibility.
"Two questions were key: Have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures?
About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second.
The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role.
Petroleum geologists and meteorologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47 percent and 64 percent, respectively, believing in human involvement."
www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html
But how could the globe be warming when there has been soo much snow this winter??
www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0JsdSDa_bM
How deniers use a strawman argument to deceive people:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWJeqgG3Tl8
The Great Petition Fraud:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P8mlF8KT6I
More:
www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=D16AD4B03B869098-
Oh its a conspiracy now? Those evil corporations. Shame on them. LOL
-
The argument against a unilateral cap and trade scheme is by no means limited to the defenders of corporate interest. Take for instance Ralph Nader as mentioned above
-
What could be the basic motivation for opponents of global warming?
That's part of the right-wing dogma and all the sheep have to fall in line. -
@Agit8r
I don't yet understand all the pros and cons of the bill and I'm mainly addressing the global warming aspect. I plan to review Ralph Nader's take on it further. -
@Agit8r
From the Nader article.... I agree that a global carbon tax would be much better, but those arguing against cap and trade here don't even believe global warming is happening. Do you think deniers and corporations would be more receptive to Gore's global cap idea?
I think it's a matter of attacking the problem in phases. Some progress is better than no progress at all. -
The problem seems to be that certain companies (probably metals production, principally) might be inclined to search for greener pastures oversees, where emission regulations are even more lax than here presently. It would help us "lead by example" but how effective such leadership would necessarily be seems unclear to me.
Also, i understand that carbon sequestration would be part of the bill, which seems like a bit of a drop-in-the-bucket type boondoggle. I don't know the specifics here, as I have neither seen a breakdown or the bill in full. I understand that it is several hundred pages in length though.
If someone knows of a good breakdown, would you drop a link to it?
-
-
For those questioning or seeking more information on global warming:
www.cnas.org/naturalsecurity/consequences/climate-change
"In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released nearly unanimous findings that it is "unequivocal" that the climate is and will continue to change, and that human generation of greenhouse gases is responsible for most related changes since the 1950s."-
*rolls eyes* Kinda like that 1996 report by the UN where they just "happened" to leave out the lines that said if there were global warming, it wasn't attributable to man?
-
-
If anyone is interested in signing a petition against Cap and Trade, I would greatly appreciate it. I will be sending it to Senator Warner and Senator Webb who are my representatives from Virginia.
www.aktnow.com/node/238-
I signed it, thanks!
-
Two senators from Virginia are supposed to care what a blogger from Illinois thinks? Odd.
-
So you are against me exercising my right to address my Government?
How they vote on this affects the ENTIRE country. Odd that you didn't realize that. -
They should care because that is their frikin duty as Senators. To listen to the people.
-
I suggest you consult the Consitution, think about what a federal system means, and maybe think about electoral math. Ever heard of the word "constituent"? You'll hear representatives and senators talking about them all the time. They're one important reason the Congress takes a break in August. You're lucky to even have representation in Congress. I don't, being that I'm in a colony of sorts, where your representatives occasionally impose their will on my local jurisdiction, DC. Funny that your own representatives aren't good enough for you.
-
I am greatful for my representation mark? Where did you get that impression from my last statement. I don't think you know the Constitution Mark. The government works for us you know. Besides why do you care about my petition? your the communists that this petition is fighting against.
-
@MS
That constituent silliness hasn't been applicable since the SCOTUS ruled that corporations that may do business in a district have the "right" to buy the election of "representatives" of that district (or in the case of the senate--that state). As well, special interest groups can--by using pressure/threat of funding opponents--coerce those "representatives" of people or states to represent the interests of people/entities in other locales altogether (as in this OP ) -
besides the Cap and Trade issue is a national one.
-
@jixhon:
Most bills have national relevance, unless you're talking about earmarks.
Your thinking is all to fuzzy on this one. Seriously, this is not a partisan issue. Your senators are Democrat, so you might not trust them, but try asking your representative, who, depending on where you live, could very well be Republican. Your senators represent the citizens of Virginia, not me, not anticsrocks, etc. Just the citizens of Virginia. And for a signed petition to have any value, they would want to know if those signatures are from constituents.
There is a reason why most issue-related campaigns urge people to contact their senators (you get two) and member of congress (you only get one, because that's for a specific district). Only those people have any reason to care about what you think.
If things were as you say they are, I would not have a beef with my lack of representation in Congress. As a citizen of DC, I could contact 100 senators every time I had a gripe. Yipee! But that's not reality. So my jurisdiction still has license plates that read, "no taxation without representation."
@agit8r:
Sometimes your comments depress me. The system sort of works, but you really have your eye on where it is being undermined in insidious ways. -
Regardless of what you are saying, no one really cares. I don't see no hurt in it and the people signing it don't either. Just saying.
-
When a bill has ramifications that affect ME, I am going to voice my opinion. I hate to upset you mark, but I will contact any member of my Government that I want to, despite of what you think.
That is the beauty of democracy. Something that you seem unable to appreciate.
Don't let him intimidate you jhix. We are exercising our right as American citizens. I have contacted members of Congress not from my district, not from my state. I always give my name and my address and guess what? EVERY TIME they say that they listen to ALL AMERICANS WHO CALL THEM.
No mark, the only "fuzzy thinking" on this is coming from you. -
Yes, you have freedom of speech. You have the right to call who you want, even the non-voting shadow senator from DC, if you think it will help. And you can pretend they care. Course if you use bold type with them (read: shout), they might not take it too kindly. But I guess that's why you use the internet. To vent in a less civil manner.
-
I might vent in a more civil manner, but for the example you set with your condescending tone and the personal attacks you make. Have a nice day.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
