Patrick Kennedy’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Carbon tax

  (Please Note: I am not Congressman Kennedy)

  A couple of points.

  1. A "pure" carbon tax will hit very visible consumer products like gasoline, natural gas and home heating oil.

  Prices will rise, be attributed to the new tax (presumably passed a Democratic congress), be highly unpopular and the difference the "pure" carbon tax would have on reducing gasoline consumption and thus greenhouse gas emission reduction is hard to estimate.

  A modified carbon tax could make allowances for some consumer commodoties like gasoline and exempt them. Problem is that is a slippery slope. There are thousands of well-connected lobbyists in Washington, DC that have clients who have products they would like exempted too.

  The simplicity advantage that a pure carbon tax has is lost. The simplicity advantage of a tax to a "cap & trade" approach begins to erode.

  2. Now a few questions. Under a carbon tax, what will be the annual reduction in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 10 years from the enactment of the tax? 20 years? 30 years?

  If a tax does not have the desired effect in terms of reducing emissions, will the congress have to go back and pass a new tax increase every few years? That would be fun.

  I guess you could say I am very skeptical of the political viability of a carbon tax.On It's not the same as a carbon tax, and it's not cool posted 2 years, 3 months ago 13 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Why Before November?

  Besides the upcoming U.S. midterm elections there is another reason why the Bush administration would want to announce a policy change on global warming, if they make one, before November. The next United Nations Climate Change Conference is going to be held in Nairobi, Kenya November 6-17. At last year's conference in Montreal, the U.S. played an obstructionist role when the subject of what to do to reduce emissions post-Kyoto (i.e. after the 2008 to 2012 commitment period) came up. If there is going to be a policy change, the U.S. would want to signal it before the UN meeting.

  It is good to be very skeptical of the motivations of the Bush administration. However it may be that Bush's most important constituency, the business community, is divided on the global warming issue. The fossil fuel industry is strongly opposed to regulating greenhouse gases and much of the rest of industry accepts the fact that regulations to reduce greenhouse gases are inevitable. The part of industry that thinks regulations are coming would probably prefer to see them come under Bush who would be more sympathetic to them than would a possible Democratic President in 2009.On What to expect. posted 3 years, 2 months ago 7 Responses