Photoshop: Leo Alberti

“…It’s not just what’s in the bill. It’s the way they rammed it through the House.

Just like the porkulus: Under-handed, transparency-defying, and stuffed with earmark payoffs and bribes concocted in middle-of-the night, backroom deals.

Taxpayers are mad again. And they’re not going to sit still.

Impromptu flash protests are taking place today at state capitols and federal buildings across the country.

In Chicago:

If you are anywhere near Chicago’s Federal Plaza this afternoon, where the Tax Day Tea Party took place, then be there at 1:00pm for a cap-and-trade protest. Federal Plaza is at 230 S. Dearborn.

In Orlando. And in Canton, Ohio.

In Upland, Calif.: noon at the corner of Foothill/Euclid.

In Atlanta via Barracuda Babes:

Saturday, June 27, 200912:00 noon
State Capitol

Bring signs in Opposition to Cap and Tax
Ideas include: Cap and Tax, Cap and Traitors, Cap and tr8tors, No Taxation without Reading the Bill, Tea Party Patriots Vote

If you are not in metro Atlanta, protest at the Federal Building in your county.

Arizona protest info at Arizona Tea Party.

San Diego: Noon, 880 Front St # 4236

Temecula, CA: Noon, Ynez & Rancho California Road @ Duck Pond

More at Tea Party Patriots.

Don’t forget to let the GOP Cap-and-Tax 8 hear from you. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/27/tea-party-watch-protesting-the-cap-and-tax-cramdown/

The 8 cap-and-tax Republicans…and the 44 Democrats who voted no

By Michelle Malkin 

“…The House will vote on the cap-and-tax bill today. Make your voice heard. Phil Kerpen at AFP has compiled a very helpful list, which I’m reprinting in full here. Check AFP site for latest updates and alerts.

Ask ‘em how they can ram through this eco-boondoggle with EPA hide-and-seek games on global warming science going on unchecked:

We need your help to stop the cap-and-trade energy tax!

The time has finally come for a vote on cap-and-trade, H.R. 2454. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called a vote just before the 4th of July recess, hoping to use the specter of keeping everyone in DC and ruining their holiday, to force cap-and-trade legislation through.

This is the key target list based on our most recent information. If your Congressman is on an undecided or leaning list below PLEASE click here and enter your zip code to get your representative’s number and talking points on this issue.

If you have new information please let me know at pkerpen at afphq.org.
Republican List (Unlisted are solid no) …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/26/melt-the-phones-cap-and-tax-target-list/

Cap and tax liveblog: Democrats limit debate, stampede toward national energy tax

By Michelle Malkin 

STAMPEDE!

“…Scroll for continuous updates…there will be 3 hours of general debate and a grand total of 1 GOP amendment…

9:36am: GOP Rep. Pete Sessions is on the House floor right now blasting Dems, who just moved to limit debate. It’s “unacceptable” and “undemocratic,” says Sessions. Proposals to protect farmers and agriculture won’t be considered. Sessions recounts meetings at 2am, being handed massive, new 300-page amendment. “No one has read this bill.”

“Why are we rushing to do this with a trillion dollar spending plan that will result in killing jobs and make it more difficult for us to come out of recession?”

9:57am: Dem. Rep Castor claims this mad-rush boondoggle will “bolster science.” (Insert bitter laughter). Channels all the previous apocalpytic rhetoric swilled before every bailout: “What if we don’t act!? We can’t afford not to act?!”

Chicken Little with a green coat.

10:02am: GOP Rep. Pence blasts “embarrassingly short” debate on behemoth bill. Says there are reports that there are new trade restriction in the bill, but who knows. No has read the bill. The way the bill is coming to the floor should be disturbing to every American. Last night at 3:00am, House Dems filed 309-page amendment and denied 224 GOP amendments. Three hours, 1 amendment filed. What’s the hurry? What are we hiding – that we can’t afford more time for Americans to examine what’s in the bill? What’s in it? Corporate welfare? Special provisions to placate members? Majority just denied us one additional minute of debate?! This is not Congress! I don’t know what this is…a travesty!

Pence also mentioned that Dems shaved another minute from the GOP’s time.

10:14am: Crikey. Sheila Jackson Lee is babbling about “getting the carbon out of the air.”

10:20am: GOP Rep. Biggert talks about the five amendments that she proposed and Dems rejected. Calls attention to national building codes.

10:22am: Dem Rep. Quigley preaches cult of global warming science. Says there are no contrary studies. Gee, I wonder why: Ask Alan Carlin!

10:24am: GOP Rep. Marsha Blackburn: We are the party of KNOW. We want the people to KNOW what’s in this bill! You go, girl.

10:38am: Philip Kerpen at AFP says Dems. Ortiz and Mollohan are now no votes.

Another prominent fence-sitter: Blue Dog Dem Chair Allen Boyd.

The pay-offs: …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/26/cap-and-tax-liveblog-democrats-limit-debate-stampede-toward-national-energy-tax/

The Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill

by Ben Lieberman

“….But direct energy costs are only part of the consumer impact. Nearly everything goes up, since higher energy costs raise production costs. If you look at the total cost of Waxman-Markey, it works out to an average of $2,979 annually from 2012-2035 for a household of four. By 2035 alone, the total cost is over $4,600.

Beyond the cost impact on individuals and households, Waxman-Markey also affects employment, and especially employment in the manufacturing sector. We estimate job losses averaging 1,145,000 at any given time from 2012-2035. And note that those are net job losses, after the much-hyped green jobs are taken into account. Some of the lost jobs will be destroyed entirely, while others will be outsourced to nations like China and India that have repeatedly stated that they’ll never hamper their own economic growth with energy-cost boosting global warming measures like Waxman-Markey.

Since farming is energy intensive, that sector will be particularly hard-hit. Higher gasoline and diesel fuel costs, higher electricity costs, and higher natural gas-derived fertilizer costs all erode farm profits, which are expected to drop by 28 percent in 2012 and average 57 percent lower through 2035. As with American manufacturers, Waxman-Markey also puts American farmers at a global disadvantage, as other food-exporting nations would have no comparable energy-price raising measures in place.

Overall, Waxman-Markey reduces gross domestic product by an average of $393 billion annually between 2012 and 2035, and cumulatively by $9.4 trillion. In other words, the nation will be $9.4 trillion poorer with Waxman-Markey than without it. …”

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/tst062609a.cfm

“…The Obama administration and congressional Democrats have proposed a major cap-and-trade system aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Scientists agree that CO2 emissions around the world could lead to rising temperatures with serious long-term environmental consequences. But that is not a reason to enact a U.S. cap-and-trade system until there is a global agreement on CO2 reduction. The proposed legislation would have a trivially small effect on global warming while imposing substantial costs on all American households. And to get political support in key states, the legislation would abandon the auctioning of permits in favor of giving permits to selected corporations. …”

“…The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that the resulting increases in consumer prices needed to achieve a 15 percent CO2 reduction — slightly less than the Waxman-Markey target — would raise the cost of living of a typical household by $1,600 a year. Some expert studies estimate that the cost to households could be substantially higher. The future cost to the typical household would rise significantly as the government reduces the total allowable amount of CO2.

Americans should ask themselves whether this annual tax of $1,600-plus per family is justified by the very small resulting decline in global CO2. Since the U.S. share of global CO2 production is now less than 25 percent (and is projected to decline as China and other developing nations grow), a 15 percent fall in U.S. CO2 output would lower global CO2 output by less than 4 percent. Its impact on global warming would be virtually unnoticeable. The U.S. should wait until there is a global agreement on CO2 that includes China and India before committing to costly reductions in the United States. …”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/31/AR2009053102077.html

Who Pays for Cap and Trade?

Hint: They were promised a tax cut during the Obama campaign.

“…Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing “polluters,” not workers. Hardly. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity — in this case the right to emit carbon — and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs would inevitably be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag — now Mr. Obama’s budget director — told Congress last year that “Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program.”

Hit hardest would be the “95% of working families” Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat “unless you use energy.” Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.

The Congressional Budget Office — Mr. Orszag’s former roost — estimates that the price hikes from a 15% cut in emissions would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3% of its after-tax income every year. That’s about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9% to 2.7% of income. The rich would pay 1.7%. Cap and trade is the ideal policy for every Beltway analyst who thinks the tax code is too progressive (all five of them).

But the greatest inequities are geographic and would be imposed on the parts of the U.S. that rely most on manufacturing or fossil fuels — particularly coal, which generates most power in the Midwest, Southern and Plains states. It’s no coincidence that the liberals most invested in cap and trade — Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey — come from California or the Northeast.

Coal provides more than half of U.S. electricity, and 25 states get more than 50% of their electricity from conventional coal-fired generation. In Ohio, it totals 86%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Ratepayers in Indiana (94%), Missouri (85%), New Mexico (80%), Pennsylvania (56%), West Virginia (98%) and Wyoming (95%) are going to get soaked. …”

The Cap and Tax Fiction

Democrats off-loading economics to pass climate change bill.

“…

Even as Democrats have promised that this cap-and-trade legislation won’t pinch wallets, behind the scenes they’ve acknowledged the energy price tsunami that is coming. During the brief few days in which the bill was debated in the House Energy Committee, Republicans offered three amendments: one to suspend the program if gas hit $5 a gallon; one to suspend the program if electricity prices rose 10% over 2009; and one to suspend the program if unemployment rates hit 15%. Democrats defeated all of them.

The reality is that cost estimates for climate legislation are as unreliable as the models predicting climate change. What comes out of the computer is a function of what politicians type in. A better indicator might be what other countries are already experiencing. Britain’s Taxpayer Alliance estimates the average family there is paying nearly $1,300 a year in green taxes for carbon-cutting programs in effect only a few years.

Americans should know that those Members who vote for this climate bill are voting for what is likely to be the biggest tax in American history. Even Democrats can’t repeal that reality.

 Waxman Markey Cap and Trade’s Biggest Losers: Paper, Plastics and Rubber

“…The Waxman-Markey bill would destroy over 33,000 plastics and rubber jobs on average, which would hit a high of over 80,000 fewer jobs by 2035.

The paper industry fares a little better, but it’s still not good news. It’s like chopping off one foot as opposed to both. Heritage analysis found that with cap and trade there would be 15,000 fewer jobs on average in the paper industry, reaching 36,291 fewer jobs by 2035.

But don’t worry because the architects of the bill built in unemployment insurance; too bad it will only help 1.5% of those losing their jobs from the bill. And Over the 2012-2035 timeline, job losses average over 1.1 million. By 2035, a projected 2.5 million jobs are lost below the baseline (without a cap and trade bill) Do the workers in paper, plastics and rubber like their odds? …”

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/25/waxman-markey-cap-and-trade%e2%80%99s-biggest-losers-paper-plastics-and-rubber/

The climate change e-mails EPA doesn’t want you to see

By Michelle Malkin