from The Washington Post
The ‘Cap And Tax’ Dead End
By Sarah Palin
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America’s unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won’t bring jobs. Our nation’s debt is unsustainable, and the federal government’s reach into the private sector is unprecedented.
Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:
I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.
American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president’s cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.
There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.
Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.
In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.
The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.
The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will “necessarily skyrocket.” So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.
Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, “poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity.”
We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.
In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats.
Of course, Alaska is not the sole source of American energy. Many states have abundant coal, whose technology is continuously making it into a cleaner energy source. Westerners literally sit on mountains of oil and gas, and every state can consider the possibility of nuclear energy.
We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama’s plan will result in the latter.
For so many reasons, we can’t afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.
Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?
Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama’s energy cap-and-tax plan.
The writer, a Republican, is governor of Alaska.
From : Paul (01:27:24) :
“The middle way is fascism.”
Actually, if you were to draw a political line, on the far left would be absolute government control of everything, communism. On the far right would be absolute lack of government control, anarchy or tribalism. And right in the middle would be conservatism, where people have individual freedoms guaranteed and provided by a government that creates a safe environment. A great balance between the government’s reach and individual rights.
Oil spills are rare and in the overall scheme of things trivial. Vastly more oil is poured out into the oceans of the world from undersea vents (I have seen guesstimates; perhaps one of the geologists here can provide some numbers).
Gov. Palin’s op-ed piece is right on the money (figuratively and literally), but I wish she had addressed the core issue, the official rationale for the whole farrago of ‘cap-and-trade’, namely the hypothesis that CO2 will cause catastrophic ‘climate change’. So long as the statists in the Obambi administration and in Congress have that myth to fall back on, it is going to be very difficult to stop this ill-considered and egregious legislation from becoming law.
Yes, as others have pointed out, at best she waffled—and at worse endorsed—the AGW hypothesis during the campaign. It didn’t help that she was John McCain’s running mate, and he was the co-sponsor of cap-and-trade bill himself.
She can always say she has changed her mind.
/Mr Lynn
Erratum: “and at worse endorsed” should be “and at worst endorsed.” Sure would be nice to have Preview and Edit functions (and Quote, too). . . /Mr L
If the US energy policy was a cartoon it would never end. Nothing has ever been this ridiculous on purpose.
She is free to speak her mind now. I think she will make it very clear she does not subscribe to AGW just as she has just made it abundantly made clear she does not subscribe to Cap and Trade (both McCain positions that she essentially had to accept as his vice presidential candidate).
As to her lack of scientific understanding, name an American politician that has any . . . there probably are some, but none come to mind. That she isn’t a politician, what a relief. Can she communicate without a teleprompter, we’ll find out . . . but that doesn’t seem to be a roadblock to the presidency.
“Now that’s the truly interesting question in light of today’s court ruling against Obama.”
Details?
” Poptech (00:22:39) :
Palin already made her position clear on this issue. I don’t trust anything she says…
MODERATOR: “…do you support capping carbon emissions?”
PALIN: “I do. I do.” (Transcript)
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/?iref=mpstoryview
”
Will poptech. Here’s the transcript quotes from your link.
IFILL: Let me clear something up, Sen. McCain has said he supports caps on carbon emissions. Sen. Obama has said he supports clean coal technology, which I don’t believe you’ve always supported.
BIDEN: I have always supported it. That’s a fact.
IFILL: Well, clear it up for us, both of you, and start with Gov. Palin.
PALIN: Yes, Sen. McCain does support this. The chant is “drill, baby, drill.” And that’s what we hear all across this country in our rallies because people are so hungry for those domestic sources of energy to be tapped into.
They know that even in my own energy-producing state we have billions of barrels of oil and hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of clean, green natural gas. And we’re building a nearly $40 billion natural gas pipeline which is North America’s largest and most you expensive infrastructure project ever to flow those sources of energy into hungry markets.
Barack Obama and Sen. Biden, you’ve said no to everything in trying to find a domestic solution to the energy crisis that we’re in. You even called drilling — safe, environmentally-friendly drilling offshore as raping the outer continental shelf.
There — with new technology, with tiny footprints even on land, it is safe to drill and we need to do more of that. But also in that “all of the above” approach that Sen. McCain supports, the alternative fuels will be tapped into: the nuclear, the clean coal.
I was surprised to hear you mention that because you had said that there isn’t anything — such a thing as clean coal. And I think you said it in a rope line, too, at one of your rallies.
IFILL: We do need to keep within our two minutes. But I just wanted to ask you, do you support capping carbon emissions?
PALIN: I do. I do.
IFILL: OK. And on the clean coal issue?
BIDEN: Absolutely. Absolutely we do. We call for setting hard targets, number one…
Seems a clarification is in order. Problem is, in the pre-election stuff, you don’t neccesarly know which are her views and which are McCains.
Palin’s article is good, but the comments on it by WaPo readers are more revealing as to the “climate” of opinion we find ourselves in. It appears that half or more of the respondents don’t believe Ms. Palin actually wrote the piece. They think she is illiterate and incapable of such a feat.
Brace yourselves for this, gentle WUWT readers and AGW skeptics: most alarmists assume the very same thing about YOU. Little wonder that they are incapable of listening to anything you say.
JimB (02:22:09) – Since you ask, here is the briefest explanation.
In re court ruling against Obama (US District Court, Central District of CA)
There are several court cases still pending that have not been summarily dismissed (as has happened for many others). This is one that slipped under the radar; at the last minute several US Attys submitted a Statement of Interest in which they once again tried to use the ‘lack of standing’ argument to have the case dismissed. They were shot down. The briefest explanation for what happened can be found here:
http://vrwcgrapevine.blogspot.com/2009/07/obama-eligibility-case-will-be-heard-on.html
The attorney in this case has herself several pending cases, in addition to the one that she got a favorable ruling on yesterday. From the attorney’s site (warning – she’s an attorney, not a blogger; sometimes her postings are a bit messy):
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/
I learned late last night that she announced that she has filed a motion for a default judgment against Obama. From there it moves to the discovery phase, where the judge can order release of documents (real, original long-form birth certificate, passport info, college info, etc.). Other court cases and appeals are sure to follow. This could end up getting appealed to the 9th Circ Ct of Appeals and then on to Supreme Ct.
She also has another case in Georgia on Thursday, June 16, for a temporary restraining order against his chain of command (up to Def Secy Gates) for a military officer refusing to ship to Afghanistan until questions of legitimacy are resolved.
There are several sites covering this slowly (that’s the way the court system works) unfolding story. Mostly I find myself separating the wheat from the chaff. The short, short version is that, when these cases move to the discovery phase and based on case law (where ‘natural born’ has been defined) this has the potential to have a greater impact than Watergate. The rest of this year should be very interesting, especially when the major media finally take notice of this – it could get very vitriolic and messy.
Enough of this politics mess. Now let’s turn back to simpler things like science and the climate.
nvw, I am always amazed at the misinterpretation of Genesis, chapter 1. As a fundamentalist Jew, I can sympathize with the fundamentalist Christians who are always being told by others what they believe. Certainly, if you wish to believe that Genesis says that the earth was created in seven days, I cannot prevent you. However, the time period that is expressed does not actually translate to a day. In point of fact, we don’t know what it translates to. It is one of those words in Hebrew that we have lost the translation for. It could stand for an indeterminate amount of time, or it could stand for a billion years.
In addition, that particular part of Genesis is written in a poetic style, which means that the words were meant to be interpreted on many different levels, and thus to look at it as having some absolute meaning is also wrong. If I were to say, in a poem, that “the sun painted the sky with streaks of red and orange”, I could not be accused of actually believing that the sun was using a paintbrush and paint on the surface of the sky. I am using poetry to illuminate the feeling that I had when looking at the morning sky as the sun rose.
Being married to a bible scholar, I have absorbed a bit of knowledge about the subject.
The arguement over cap-and-trade does not need input Sarah Palin, her past comments make her look like a flip-flopper on such issues.
Some here seem to think that VP candidates speak for themselves during a presidential campaign. I read one of you opining on Palin’s social political views.
I for one haven’t heard much of her own views, but lots of those that were prepared for her by McCain’s people during the 2008 campaign.
This is pretty much the first thing I have heard directly from her on Cap and Trade. I look forward to hearing more of her views in the coming months and years as she prepares for the inevitable run in 2012.
So far I haven’t made any decisions regarding the 2012 election, and am only beginning to think about 2010 mid-terms.
Lots of time, speeches and op-eds to go.
That’s all we need. Her opinion on this matter. It’s tough enough to get people to listen to other facts on this issue but now that she has gone public on this, less will listen to it because she is a big name.
If Palin does not run as a Right-of-Center candidate, not simply a Republican, then she has no chance. Her most significant claim to fame is as someone who has the courage to take on the corrupt politicians in her own party — and then go on to win. No small feat.
Even though she waffled big time on AGW and cap-and-trade — I saw it and heard it — she remains one of the strongest candidates because of her record — including as a campaigner.
Remember, Obama is in office, not because he won the most votes, but because of fraud in the Democratic National Party during the campaign, fraud in voter registrations — especially all those “young people” — and fraud(?) in the mainstream media, including Fox, that refused, refused, refused to investigate/vet him. Most importantly he and his supporters have been spending $100,000 per week to stifle every bit of information about him since, well, 2007. He is not qualified to be President because, at the very least, he is only a “native born citizen” not a “natural born citizen”. Lobbyists, lawyers, corporate types, financiers all supported Obama from very early on. Finally, Obama is in office because so-called Republican Conservatives stayed home from polls because they could not stomach McCain, a true American even if one violently disagreed with him. They bear a large responsibity for the present mess.
This true Liberal — life-long, but never again a Democrat — finds Sarah Palin’s actual record to be one of the strongest of all potential candidates for the presidency –limited, relevant government, strong national defense, responsible energy development, actual science of “global warming”, and development of the most important strengths of this country. I do worry about her support of the UN Law of the Sea Treaty.
If Centrists could develop our own media outlets, we could begin to ignore the lies that have bun spun for far too long, rather than responding to them and giving them longer life (assertive rather than defensive). Thanks to Anthony and WUWT, “we” have an important home here.
Ralph Ellis
“Needless to say, a prime plank of Creationism is that the world was created in seven days”
Well, not really, Ralph. Significant counterexamples at http://www.reasons.org/
The media are perpetually in a posture of “Let’s you and him fight” (while they cover the story). They use broad labels to project polarized positions while frequently ignoring a whole spectrum of intervening views. This is true for religion, economics, history, politics, you name it. Beware of reasoning from the label to specific views.
But we’re really too far OT here.
I was familiar with Gov Palin long before the media was from the lesser 48. I actually saw an oil spill in Alaska next to the railroad and compared with I saw with what the Anchorage Mcclatchy paper reported. Gov Palin has more energy industry insight that McCain, Biden, Oblahma and Oblahmas relevant EPA/energy or related czars.
I know why people hate her. She stands for things that expose the values and character flaws in a lot of people. Alaska has huge coal and metal ore reserves. Alaska also has a lot of natural gas. Most of you all do not know how strongly natural gas producers lobby against coal generating plants. Until 20 years ago, a lot of the oil companies had a lot of coal reserves and were active in production. I can name several companies in business converting autos to natural gas. Oh it is clean. If you don’t change oil, your oil will still look clean after years for example burning propane.
I made money when oil was first discovered in Alaska. I also followed the discovery of the Bakken field and the Williston basin. Yes we have oil. Gov Palin is a real thorn in the side of the lawyers and their lies in Washington regarding minerals. Liars hate being exposed.
Folks read what she says. Her terms, goals and viewpoint regarding CO2 production is not the same.
Hoi Polloi (03:30:48) :,
And can you show us the parts of the Palin interview that didn’t wind up on the cutting room floor?
Pofarmer (06:33:53) :
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=103918
BTW nice to see you around here.
I need to revise one of my previous remarks:
Hoi Polloi (03:30:48) :,
And can you show us the parts of the Palin interview that wound up on the cutting room floor?
layne Blanchard (06:06:36) :
Re the Obama’s citizenship: “It will probably come down to his mother having been too young to convey citizenship to him when he was born overseas.”
No. His father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., was a citizen of the UK, then Kenya after its independence (and one of the most radical marxist-muslims of the new Kenya). Since one parent is not an American citizen, Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen. His mother’s age is not the issue.
I hope you notice that the phrase “cap-and-trade” is only used twice and both times it was linked with negative economic consequences. Every other time it is mentioned she uses its correct name, “cap-and-tax”. Very on point.
Ok – whether you’re a Palin supporter or not, has it occurred to anyone to wonder why she is basing her opposition to cap and trade on foreign energy dependency?
The point of cap and trade is to reduce pollution. But she doesn’t mention that even once, not even in passing.
I can only surmise she doesn’t understand this issue, or she would have based her opposition on why cap and trade won’t reduce pollution, or why she doesn’t believe industrial pollution is a threat or exists in meaningful enough amounts to combat it with cap and trade.
For that matter, she doesn’t even talk about why she has changed her mind on cap and trade, a policy she clearly supported during her VP campaign.
All that’s missing is her coming ojut and saying flatly that AGW is bunk. Many members of Congress and Senate oppose cap-and-trade, but few are ready to publicly say that the AGW theory doesn’t hold water.
As long as most politicians continue to be too afraid to denounce the science behind the supposed IPCC\Al Gore “consensus”, they will only seem shallow when they oppose ways to fight global warming.
The insanity will persist until AGW is publicly and widely discredited.
Most folks I know are just trying to meet the challenges of maintaining a family and making ends meet. They are certainly not following current energy policy
The average Joe doesn’t think about this at all or he thinks this will affect someone else – not him.
I am confident that when Main Street USA begins to see what C&T will do to their personal energy cost, they will vote the current fools out and this nonsense will come to a screeching halt.
John G writes: “She is free to speak her mind now. I think she will make it very clear she does not subscribe to AGW just as she has just made it abundantly made clear she does not subscribe to Cap and Trade (both McCain positions that she essentially had to accept as his vice presidential candidate).”
There was never a better opportunity to “speak her mind” about AGW than in her WaPo column, since cap and trade is meant to address AGW. She didn’t even go there, but rather, argued it won’t reduce our dependency on foreign oil.
She’s either ignorant of the issue or politically afraid to make a real argument against AGW when given the perfect opportunity to do so.