HR 367, the Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2013

August 1, 2013

 

Congressman Scalise,

 

We write to express our support for your amendment to HR 367, the Regulations From the Executive in

Need of Scrutiny Act of 2013. The last thing the American people need is a new tax, especially a carbon

tax. 

 

A carbon tax would hurt American families by driving up the cost of energy as well as reducing economic

growth. According to a study of one popular carbon tax proposal, a carbon tax would reduce the income of

a family of four by $1,000 a year, cost the economy over 400,000 jobs by 2016, and increase the price of

gasoline by 30 cents a gallon by 2030.

 

1

Not only would a carbon tax harm the economy, it would have no substantive impact on global tempera

-ture. If we would reduce America’s carbon dioxide emissions to zero, global temperature would only be

0.052°C lower by 2050 and 0.137°C by 2100—not enough to have any substantive impact on climate.

2

A carbon tax would not reduce U.S. carbon dioxide emissions to zero and would therefore have even less of a

climate impact. 

 

There are no arguments for a carbon tax that make sense. Some argue that implementing a carbon tax could

actually make the tax code more efficient. This claim is not supported by the economics literature. The

best literature on the topic explains that a revenue-neutral carbon tax swap would make the tax code more

inefficient and would hinder economic growth. Some estimates suggest that this ‘tax interaction ef

fect’ is so powerful that the theoretical size of a new carbon tax should be cut almost in half, once extra damage to

the economy is taken into account.  

 

Another argument some advance to support a carbon tax is that it would substantially reduce global warming. But again, the reality is that U.S. Government acting unilaterally cannot significantly slow global carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, William Nordhaus’ work suggests that if only half of the world’s governments implement the ‘optimal carbon tax,’ then the economic cost of achieving a desired environmental objective will increase by 250 percent.

 3

 

Lastly and most importantly, the American people do not support a carbon tax. According to a recent survey, two thirds (64 percent) of respondents believe that energy costs are already too high compared to other goods and services.Among those surveyed, half are less likely to vote for a Member of Congress if he/she supports a carbon tax. Any effort to focus on issues other than the economy will be seen as a distraction or diversion, according to survey respondents.Given repeated declarations from the President that he intends to move forward with his global warming agenda unilaterally in the absence of Congressional action, your amendment explicitly requiring any tax or fee on carbon to be approved by Congress is a crucial safeguard for taxpayers.

 

Sincerely,

 

60 Plus Association

Freedom Action

American Commitment

FreedomWorks

American Energy Alliance

Heritage Action for America

Americans for Limited Government

High Impact Leadership Coalition

Americans for Prosperity

Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles

Americans for Tax Reform

National Black Chamber of Commerce

American Tradition Institute

Positive Growth Alliance

Citizens Against Government Waste

Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Competitive Enterprise Institute

Tea Party Nation

Congress of Racial Equality

1 David W. Kreutzer & Kevin Dayaratna,

Boxer–Sanders Carbon Tax: Economic Impact,

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/04/boxer-sanders-

carbon-tax-economic-impact,

Apr. 11, 2013.

2 Patrick J. Michaels & Paul C. Knappenberger, Current Wisdom: We Calculate, You Decide: A Handy-Dandy Carbon Tax Temperature-Savings Calculator, http://

www.cato.org/blog/current-wisdom-we-calculate-you-decide-handy-dandy-carbon-tax-temperature-savings-calculator, July 23, 2013. This is using the 3°C

climate sensitivity advocated by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

3 Robert P. Murphy,

Rolling the Dice: Nordhaus’ Dubious Case for a Carbon Tax

, June 2008, http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/up

-

loads/2008/06/2008-06_rolling_the_dice_murphy.pdf.

4 IER Survey Finds Broad-Based Opposition to Carbon Tax, July 16, 2013, http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2013/07/16/ier-survey-finds-broad-based-

opposition-to-carbon-tax/.

2