Republican Administrations always raise taxes, either directly , as George “Read My Lips” Bush did, or indirectly through deficit spending and debt, as Ronald Reagan and George “Mission Accomplished” Bush did. So Republican claims to guardianship of the American pocketbook are disingenuous at best, sinister at worst.
And their latest ploy shows them at their sinister worst. Republicans in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee are threatening to boycott the committee’s vote on the climate bill, which would prevent the bill from reaching the Senate floor for a full vote. To advance the bill, the committee needs at least two Republicans present.
The Republicans claim to be concerned that the EPA has not done a thorough enough analysis of the cost of the Senate bill to taxpayers, but delaying the bill would cost taxpayers more, both in staff time at the EPA and in costs associated with global warming.
The committee’s minority chair, Sen. James Inhofe, has complained that Democrats are acting as if “it’s outrageous for us to ask for even two months” of delay. But why two months? Because the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen will end in just under two months.
A boycott that stalls the bill for two months wouldn’t just slow the American legislative process, it would undermine the worldwide effort to halt global warming. The U.S. may not have a deadline for the bill, but the rest of the planet needs it before December. The U.N. has asked the U.S. to show leadership at Copenhagen, and the Senate bill–weakened as it is by concessions to utilities, oil, coal, Republicans–has to serve as part of the foundation of that leadership.
So what of Republican concerns about the EPA analysis? You’ll find the EPA analysis here (pdf). It estimates the cost of the differences between the Senate bill and the version passed by the House this summer, the American Clean Energy and Security Act. Where the two bills overlap, and they overlap substantially, the EPA uses its analysis from the House bill instead of repeating the same work for the Senate version.
Normally, unduplicated work would be considered a savings for taxpayers.
Related articles by Zemanta
Next post: The upside of the downturn
Previous post: Amid the Copenhagen naysayers, look who’s saying ‘yes we can’
