Americans for Prosperity has launched an effort to get office holders to pledge not to vote for any climate change legislation that increases federal government revenue. AFP announced earlier this week that many in the Republican Congressional leadership have signed on. The text of the pledge:
No Climate Tax Pledge:
I, ______________________, pledge to the taxpayers of the state of _______________ and to the American people that I will oppose any legislation relating to climate change that includes a net increase in government revenue.
It’s a worthwhile exercise, and while I know you have to keep these things short and simple, here is what I would add to the pledge:
I will also oppose any legislation relating to climate change that:
1. Includes a net increase in revenues to rent-seekers like Al Gore.
2. Includes a net increase in revenues to research funding whores like university environmental study centers.
3. Coerces utilities and industries (and therefore their customers) to pay added fees and surcharges that are redirected to other useless, government-mandated programs such as energy efficiency and green jobs.
4. Prevents the construction of new fossil fuel-powered power plants.
5. Subsidizes costly, inefficient sources of energy at the expense of less expensive, more efficient ones.
6. Does not measure results of policies it advocates in terms of their affect on global average temperatures, rather than greenhouse gas emissions.
I could probably think of more but that’s a start.
I think the AFP pledge is quite weak and full of loopholes. How about a cap and trade plan that gives away the permits instead of auctions them off? Or what about one that has revenue offsets in other areas? I guess they would be just fine. AFP doesn’t seem to be asking law makers to come out against cap and trade because it’s horrible policy, but because it might result in net revenues to the government. My guess is that the negative growth effects of any cap and trade plan will insure that.