Election Exegesis: Cap-and-Trade Hurts

by William Yeatman on November 3, 2010

in Blog

House Democrats who voted for the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill were big losers in the congressional elections. Approximately thirty Democrats who voted for Waxman-Markey were defeated. This does not include Democratic losses in open seats in which the incumbent chose not to run for-re-election.

Representative Rick Boucher, a senior fourteen-term Democrat from Virginia’s coal district (the 9th), negotiated the deal that led to passage of Waxman-Markey by a 219-212 vote on June 26, 2009. Boucher lost and took many coal-state Democrats with him.

“One of the clearest messages voters sent last night was a repudiation of cap-and-trade and other policies to raise energy prices,” said Myron Ebell, Director of CEI’s Center for Energy and Environment.

Other House Democrats who voted for Waxman-Markey and lost include: Betsy Markey in Colorado; Alan Grayson, Allen Boyd, Suzanne Kosmas, and Ron Klein in Florida; Debbie Halvorson and Phil Hare in Illinois; Baron Hill in Indiana; Frank Kratovil in Maryland; Mark Schauer in Michigan; James Oberstar in Minnesota; Ike Skelton in Missouri; Dina Titus in Nevada; Carol Shea-Porter in New Hampshire; John Adler in New Jersey; Harry Teague in New Mexico; John Hall, Michael McMahon, and Scott Murphy in New York; Bob Etheridge in North Carolina; Zack Space, John Boccieri, Steve Driehaus, and Mary Jo Kilroy in Ohio; Patrick Murphy in Pennsylvania; John Spratt in South Carolina; Tom Perriello in Virginia; and Steve Kagen in Wisconsin.

Present November 3, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Republican Mike Castle openly stated one of the big causes for losing his primary in Delaware to O'donell was his support for Cap and Trade.

Dan Pangburn November 4, 2010 at 3:10 am

Climate Scientists make up scare stories to get money.

Politicians believed the scare stories and sent money.

It looks like the voters are beginning to realize that the scare stories have been made up.

Cap and Tax was a suicidal solution to a non-problem.

From 2001 through August 2010 the atmospheric CO2 increased by 21% of the total increase from 1800 to 2001 while the average global temperature has not increased significantly and the trend of the average of the five reporting agencies from 2001 through 2009 is down. The 21% CO2 increase is the significant measurement.

As this wide and rapidly growing separation between the rising CO2 level and not-rising temperature continues, more and more people are beginning to realize that maybe they missed something.

A simple equation, with inputs of only sunspot number and carbon dioxide level, calculates the average global temperature trends since 1895 with 88% accuracy. See the equation, an eye-opening graph of the results and how they are derived in the pdfs at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&… (see especially the pdfs made public on 4/10/10 and 6/27/10). The future average global temperature trend that this equation calculates is down.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: