Carbon Tax Center

Counting on Failure, Energy Chairman Floats Carbon Tax

07/8/2007 by Charles Komanoff

Counting on Failure, Energy Chairman Floats Carbon Tax (NYT)

The New York Times reported Saturday that Rep. John Dingell, the powerful Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, "planned to propose a steep new 'carbon tax' that would raise the cost of burning oil, gas and coal, in a move that could shake up the political debate on global warming."

The Times reported:

Mr. Dingell, in an interview to be broadcast Sunday on C-Span, suggested that his goal was to show that Americans are not willing to face the real cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. His message appeared to be that Democratic leaders were setting unrealistic legislative goals. “I sincerely doubt that the American people will be willing to pay what this is really going to cost them," said Mr. Dingell, whose committee will be drafting a broad bill on climate change this fall.

The Times article makes no mention of a revenue-neutral carbon tax. A revenue-neutral carbon tax, such as CTC has proposed and which is supported by economists and opinion-leaders across the political spectrum, can protect vulnerable American households while instilling essential incentives for reducing U.S. emissions in time to prevent atmospheric concentrations of CO₂ from reaching an irreversible tipping point.

There is no longer any serious scientific question that CO₂ emissions must be reduced massively and quickly. Following a careful examination of the alternative approaches to reducing CO₂ emissions, probably taking at least another eighteen months, we are confident that the American people and Congress will recognize that the cost of reducing CO₂ emissions now is far less than the cost of suffering the costs of unmitigated CO₂ emissions later, and that putting a price on carbon emissions is an essential component of any plan to obtain the necessary reductions. Mr. Dingell underestimates the willingness of the American people "to pay what this is really going to cost them," particularly given the economic and national security benefits of a revenue-neutral carbon tax.