 March 4, 2009
Dear Friend, As you read this week's WeGetIt.org Wednesday Bulletin, please be thinking of friends who would benefit from it, and then forward it to them. Thanks for your support! A tax by any other name...
In his televised address to Congress, President Obama again promised that 95 percent of working families wouldn't see their taxes rise by “a single dime.” Yet, the budget he released two days later calls for $78.7 billion in new revenues in 2012 from a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. As former House Speaker Newt Gingrich pointed out, that’s just clever sleight-of-hand to slip a massive energy tax into the budget. The money for that revenue will come out of the pocket of folks who, directly or indirectly, depends on fossil fuels. Did you catch that? That means every American will see their costs rise. Fossil fuels run our transportation system, most of our electrical generating system, and much more. One electric utility CEO who supports reducing carbon emissions calls it a “carbon tax” that he will have to pass on to his customers, resulting in an estimated 13% rate increase. "The least taxed under the new plan,” quipped Gingrich, “will be the Amish."
Humor aside, carbon cap-and-trade is a regressive energy tax that will most impact the poor. The Department of Energy's latest figures show that millions of below-poverty level households already spend a much greater share of their income on home energy use than the rest of us. That percentage rises substantially (common estimates are 20-25% or more) when indirect costs, like growing and transporting food to grocery stores, are included. We are about to punish the poor in the name of reducing fossil fuel use. The wealthy will easily cope, but our poorest neighbors will soon face very difficult choices. Cap-and-trade’s hidden expense and disproportionate impact on the poor is another example of why Christians must stand up and speak the truth about environmental care and poverty. Will you start by taking a moment to forward this to your family and friends? They can join you in signing the WeGetIt.org Declaration; the web site also features some practical ideas for caring for the environment and the poor, Biblically.Government funding for research & development: According to The Los Angeles Times, major technological breakthroughs are going to be necessary to make alternative energy solutions price competitive with coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear. Without those breakthroughs, achieving large reductions in carbon dioxide emissions will come only at very high cost, forcing major reductions in standard of living.
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, a physicist, calls for major government investment in research and development in pursuit of such technological breakthroughs. There is some small comfort in this, since by comparison with other policies to fight global warming, the Copenhagen Consensus ranks R&D best. But put the emphasis on small: It ranks 14th in cost effectiveness on a list of 20 policies to improve human well being, far behind things like #1 micronutrient supplements for children, #2 achievement of the Doha development agenda, and #3 micronutrient fortification of foods generally in the developing world. But there's another weakness in Chu's push for more government-funded R&D on energy technology: Government has a terrible track record for picking promising investments. R&D investment is better guided by the private sector, where people risk their own money, and hope for their own fortunes, when they invest. Every dollar the government spends on R&D is a dollar private investors can't direct instead--and therefore a dollar likely to be less effectively spent.Environmental Pharisees Jesus frequently came into conflict with the Pharisees--hyper-strict religious leaders of His day--because they erected rules that went far beyond the requirements of divinely revealed law. He accused them of straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel; loading people with burdens no one could bear; and substituting the traditions of men for the commandments of God. Some modern environmentalists are not much different, promulgating hyper-strict rules with unjustified moral fervor. They confuse debatable prudence with divinely revealed principle. A case in point is opposition to soft toilet paper. Because recycled paper won't work, soft toilet paper must be made from freshly pulped trees. But, says Dr. Allen Hershkowitz of the Natural Resources Defense Council, "No forest of any kind should be used to make toilet paper." Got that? "Should" is a moral term, and “no forest of any kind” makes it an absolute moral judgment. But whether or not we may cultivate trees solely to make toilet paper is a prudential judgment on which reasonable people can differ. Legalism may be easier to satisfy than the law of love, but the Apostle Paul strongly condemned it:
Now, please forward this message to your pastor, other Christian leaders, and friends and urge them to sign the WeGetIt.org Declaration, too! The more people sign, the stronger the message our leaders will hear that Biblical principles and factual evidence, not media hype about speculative fears like global warming, should guide our care for the environment and the poor.Gratefully, We value your privacy. If you received this from a friend, you can join the campaign at www.WeGetIt.org. This message was originally sent to [email address suppressed] because someone signed the WeGetIt.org Declaration as "fullname." Edit your name | Bulletin Archives | Unsubscribe | Inquiries |
