Today in Washington D. C. - June 26, 2009
The House of Representatives is debating and scheduled to vote on H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (the "Cap and Trade Energy Bill"). H.R. 2454, also known as the called Waxman-Markey bill (Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Edward Markey (D-MA), will place a severe regulatory burden on American businesses, which will increase their costs and reduce their competitiveness, hurting our nation’s economy. These higher operating costs for utilities, oil companies, and industry will ultimately trickle down to individual Americans, resulting in an estimated 74% more for gasoline, 90% more for electricity, and 55% more on our natural gas bills. And that’s not the end of it. We’ll also pay more for every product that requires fossil fuels in its manufacture or transportation!
The Heritage Foundation estimates the impact. Not considering larger states like Ohio which rely on coal production, lets consider Arkansas. It is estimated that Cap and Trade will increase the cost of operations for Arkansas’ schools by over $63 million through higher electric rates and natural gas rates. This is an average of $232,000 per school district per year that can no longer be used to hire teachers or give teachers raises. These increased energy costs will require higher property tax rates for Arkansas property owners. The same can be said across the country. In addition, The Heritage Foundation estimates that cap-in-trade could increase the average American family’s energy bill by $1,500 annually!
Senate is in recess until Monday, July 6. When the Senate returns, it will resume consideration of the fiscal year 2010 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill, H.R. 2918.
Yesterday, the Senate
- disappointedly voted 62-35 to confirm anti-gun advocate Yale Law School Dean Howard Koh as legal advisor to the State Department. Senate Republicans attempted to kill the Koh nomination with a filibuster -- until eight of them crossed the aisle to help Democrats confirm Koh. The Senators were: Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Susan Collins (R-ME), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Richard Lugar (R-IN), Mel Martinez (R-FL), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and George Voinovich (R-OH).
- voted 65-31 to table a motion by Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) to return the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill (H.R. 2918) to committee and have it reported back without a funding increase over the prior year, except for security funds.
- Republicans announced that Sen. John Thune of South Dakota was elected as Policy Committee Chairman and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was elected Vice Chairwoman of the Republican Conference.
National Government Run Health Care: Yesterday, Senate Democrats spent a lot of time celebrating their self-proclaimed achievement of coming up with a health care reform bill that “only” costs $1 trillion. The New York Times reports, “[Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max] Baucus was upbeat. After a meeting of his committee on Thursday, he said, ‘The Congressional Budget Office now tells us we have options that would enable us to write a $1 trillion bill, fully paid for.’” And “[Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent] Conrad said the Finance Committee had made ‘remarkable progress’ in whittling down the bill’s initial price tag of $1.6 trillion.”
Democrats seem awfully proud to now have a bill that they’ve whittled down to $1,000,000,000,000. Recall that the unprecedented stimulus bill passed in February cost $787 billion, without counting interest. And $1 trillion was about how much the entire federal government spent in 1987. One can hardly call a bill costing $1 trillion a bargain.
Though Baucus says the bill will be “fully paid for,” he’s given no specifics on how exactly that will happen. Indeed, The New York Times writes today, “It has become the trillion-dollar question: can President Obama find that much in spending cuts and tax increases to keep his campaign promise to overhaul the health care system, without adding to already huge deficits? Mr. Obama and the Democrats running Congress are deeply split over the possibilities.”
The Times notes that a couple of the options identified are:
- to “[l]imit income-tax deductions for high earners.” But “Democratic leaders immediately objected that that would hurt charities, universities and other entities dependent on tax-deductible donations, as well as taxpayers in high-tax cities and states, including New York City and other places home to Democratic leaders.”
- to “[i]ncrease behavior-changing ‘sin taxes.’” According to the NYT, “Congressional analyses show that more than $200 billion over 10 years could be collected from new or increased taxes on sugared soft drinks, tobacco products and alcoholic beverages implicated in common health problems like obesity and cancer. . . . The government could raise $61.5 billion with an additional alcoholic beverage tax that would mean about 40 cents more for a fifth of liquor, 48 cents for a six-pack of beer and 49 cents on a bottle of wine.” However, “[e]ach of these taxes is often criticized as regressive, meaning it would disproportionately affect lower-income people.”
And The Washington Post adds, “The [Democrats’ proposal] also is expected to include just over $300 billion in new taxes on health insurance benefits that millions get from their employers.” Yet, The Post writes, “Many Democrats oppose the new tax, and President Obama campaigned against the idea. But lawmakers said they could identify few acceptable alternatives.”
While Democrats may be celebrating spending only $1 trillion, taxpayers will not be pleased with that bill. And of course, in the end it very doubtful that this actually “make health care more affordable and accessible but which [won’t] force people off their current plans.” All we will have left is Defective National Government Run Health Care!
Tags: Barack Obama, cap-and-trade, health care, increased taxes, nationalized health care, US Congress, US House, US Senate, Washington D.C. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
The Heritage Foundation estimates the impact. Not considering larger states like Ohio which rely on coal production, lets consider Arkansas. It is estimated that Cap and Trade will increase the cost of operations for Arkansas’ schools by over $63 million through higher electric rates and natural gas rates. This is an average of $232,000 per school district per year that can no longer be used to hire teachers or give teachers raises. These increased energy costs will require higher property tax rates for Arkansas property owners. The same can be said across the country. In addition, The Heritage Foundation estimates that cap-in-trade could increase the average American family’s energy bill by $1,500 annually!
Senate is in recess until Monday, July 6. When the Senate returns, it will resume consideration of the fiscal year 2010 Legislative Branch Appropriations bill, H.R. 2918.
Yesterday, the Senate
- disappointedly voted 62-35 to confirm anti-gun advocate Yale Law School Dean Howard Koh as legal advisor to the State Department. Senate Republicans attempted to kill the Koh nomination with a filibuster -- until eight of them crossed the aisle to help Democrats confirm Koh. The Senators were: Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Susan Collins (R-ME), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Richard Lugar (R-IN), Mel Martinez (R-FL), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and George Voinovich (R-OH).
- voted 65-31 to table a motion by Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) to return the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill (H.R. 2918) to committee and have it reported back without a funding increase over the prior year, except for security funds.
- Republicans announced that Sen. John Thune of South Dakota was elected as Policy Committee Chairman and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was elected Vice Chairwoman of the Republican Conference.
National Government Run Health Care: Yesterday, Senate Democrats spent a lot of time celebrating their self-proclaimed achievement of coming up with a health care reform bill that “only” costs $1 trillion. The New York Times reports, “[Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max] Baucus was upbeat. After a meeting of his committee on Thursday, he said, ‘The Congressional Budget Office now tells us we have options that would enable us to write a $1 trillion bill, fully paid for.’” And “[Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent] Conrad said the Finance Committee had made ‘remarkable progress’ in whittling down the bill’s initial price tag of $1.6 trillion.”
Democrats seem awfully proud to now have a bill that they’ve whittled down to $1,000,000,000,000. Recall that the unprecedented stimulus bill passed in February cost $787 billion, without counting interest. And $1 trillion was about how much the entire federal government spent in 1987. One can hardly call a bill costing $1 trillion a bargain.
Though Baucus says the bill will be “fully paid for,” he’s given no specifics on how exactly that will happen. Indeed, The New York Times writes today, “It has become the trillion-dollar question: can President Obama find that much in spending cuts and tax increases to keep his campaign promise to overhaul the health care system, without adding to already huge deficits? Mr. Obama and the Democrats running Congress are deeply split over the possibilities.”
The Times notes that a couple of the options identified are:
- to “[l]imit income-tax deductions for high earners.” But “Democratic leaders immediately objected that that would hurt charities, universities and other entities dependent on tax-deductible donations, as well as taxpayers in high-tax cities and states, including New York City and other places home to Democratic leaders.”
- to “[i]ncrease behavior-changing ‘sin taxes.’” According to the NYT, “Congressional analyses show that more than $200 billion over 10 years could be collected from new or increased taxes on sugared soft drinks, tobacco products and alcoholic beverages implicated in common health problems like obesity and cancer. . . . The government could raise $61.5 billion with an additional alcoholic beverage tax that would mean about 40 cents more for a fifth of liquor, 48 cents for a six-pack of beer and 49 cents on a bottle of wine.” However, “[e]ach of these taxes is often criticized as regressive, meaning it would disproportionately affect lower-income people.”
And The Washington Post adds, “The [Democrats’ proposal] also is expected to include just over $300 billion in new taxes on health insurance benefits that millions get from their employers.” Yet, The Post writes, “Many Democrats oppose the new tax, and President Obama campaigned against the idea. But lawmakers said they could identify few acceptable alternatives.”
While Democrats may be celebrating spending only $1 trillion, taxpayers will not be pleased with that bill. And of course, in the end it very doubtful that this actually “make health care more affordable and accessible but which [won’t] force people off their current plans.” All we will have left is Defective National Government Run Health Care!
Tags: Barack Obama, cap-and-trade, health care, increased taxes, nationalized health care, US Congress, US House, US Senate, Washington D.C. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 11:49 AM - Post Link
2 Comments:
So are we trying to push every viable buisness out and let the goverment take over all the weak ones. If you ask me thats a little scary. If this passes all of these companies with go to china or elswhere.
It is all so frightening for Our Freedoms and the hard earned money to live on... we are all burning the wires...
I sure Pray it works, and enough of them chicken out on passing this... This Country is in desperate times...
Post a Comment
<< Home