Saturday, March 20, 2010

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones urges no on "cap and trade".

"Cap and trade" is based on two fundamental premises;

  1. global warming is real, bad, and causally linked to energy consumption, and
  2. energy consumption can be decreased by making energy more expensive.
The second is incontrovertible, the first not so much. There is an ongoing debate over global warming. People on both sides of the debate can point to "science" that substantiates their positions and their proposed solutions.

"Cap and trade" will raise the cost of energy, and those costs, like all production costs, will be passed along until they land in the lap of those who cannot pass the costs on to anyone else. Thus, the cost of living will rise for those who are least able to afford the increase, those at the bottom of the economic pyramid.

Here at home, the New Mexico Environment Department plans to petition the Environmental Improvement Board, a state regulatory board, for a cap and trade program aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones writes;
“Cap-and-trade will substantially raise the costs of energy production on everyone including small businesses. It will hurt a very large segment of our population including senior citizens on fixed incomes, the poor and the unemployed.

This flawed idea is a job killing program that hurts New Mexico’s families.

Cap-and-trade programs have been proven to drive up the costs on everything. I cannot support placing additional regulations based on weak science on our businesses, farmers and ranchers, especially during these tough economic times.”
It is important to note that neither of these bodies are elected, and hence, neither is directly accountable to the people who will pay the "tax" they would levy.

No comments: