The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: DixieBelle on April 01, 2008, 11:35:41 AM
-
Meanwhile Democrats Vow to Fight Any Attempt to Lessen the Blow of Lieberman-Warner Job Killing Bill
If Democrats have their way in passing global warming legislation this year, the United States “would lose between 1.2 and 1.8 million jobs in 2020 and between 3 and 4 million jobs in 2030," according to a new study conducted by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). Job losses would result because of “lower industrial output due to higher energy prices, the high cost of complying with required emissions cuts, and greater competition from overseas manufacturers with lower energy costs.†The new study comes at a time when the beleaguered Lieberman-Warner climate bill (S.2191 - America's Climate Security Act) looks to be headed for a cameo appearance on the Senate floor in June only to be shelved and passed on to another Congress. (See: Boxer Waves White Flag on Lieberman-Warner Climate Bill )
The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) released the SAIC study today highlighting the damaging economic impacts of the Lieberman-Warner global warming cap-and-trade bill.
The enormous costs outlined in the new study come as federal stimulus packages are being passed and the Federal Reserve is attempting to invigorate the economy.
Nevertheless, Democrats made clear this week their intention not to support any amendments to help reduce the numbers of jobs lost or skyrocketing energy costs. Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Chairman Barbara Boxer declared the Lieberman-Warner bill would be pulled from the June 2008 scheduled Senate floor debate if “weakening amendments†were added. (LINK)
EPW Ranking Member Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), responded, “This should send a chilling message to any Senator who wishes to make any changes to the bill to lessen the economic impact on their constituents." Senator Inhofe continued, "As Chairman Boxer is aware, several amendments designed to protect the economy and to deploy low emission energy sources like nuclear are likely to pass during a floor debate. Even ardent supporters of cap-and-trade in the business community, notably Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy, believe this bill is the wrong approach for America.†(LINK)
The comprehensive NAM and ACCF study assesses the harmful economic costs of the Lieberman-Warner bill on future energy costs, economic growth, employment, production, household income and low income earners.
The NAM/ACCF study is the latest in a long series of studies revealing the massive harmful impact of Lieberman-Warner and other global warming cap-and-trade proposals.
From the Study:
The NAM/ACCF study also found that “higher energy prices would have ripple impacts on prices throughout the economy and would impose a financial cost of $739 to $2,927 per year by 2020 on national households, rising to $4,022 to $6,752 by 2030.â€
The study also found that “most energy prices would rise under [lieberman-Warner], particularly, coal, oil, and natural gas.†According to the study, “the price of gasoline would increase between 60% and 144% by 2030, while electricity prices would increase by 77% to 129%.â€
“US consumers would pay between 84% and 146% more for their natural gas by 2030,†the study found.
Echoing a previous CBO study, the NAM ACCF study found Lieberman-Warner would disproportionally harm low income families.
“The impacts of [lieberman-Warner] will be felt especially by the poor, who spend more of their income on energy and other goods than other income brackets. By 2020, higher energy prices mean that low income families (with average incomes less than $18,500) will spend between 19% and 22% of their income on energy under [lieberman-Warner] compared to a projected 17% without [lieberman-Warner]. Others on fixed incomes, such as the elderly, will also suffer disproportionately,†the study found. [Note: A 2006 survey of Colorado homeless families with children found that high energy bills were cited as one of the two main reasons they became homeless. - LINK]
In addition, the study found Lieberman-Warner’s impact on industry will take a heavy toll. Excerpt: “Some major economic sectors will be adversely hit by emission caps. By 2020, primary metals output would be reduced by between 15% and 19%; stone, glass, and clay products would be reduced by between 10% and 12%; motor vehicle manufacturing would be reduced by between 6% and 14%; and paper products would be reduced by between 5% and 7%. In addition, the general shift away from coal would result in a 35% reduction in coal production and electricity production would fall around 12%. These losses would be significantly higher by 2030 and would have a lasting impact on the economic base of the US.â€
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=aa38aae2-802a-23ad-434c-da2bd3dcfad2&Issue_id=
Go to the link to see the study and back up documents.
-
The job losses are no big deal because America's economy creates so many jobs each year. The additional cost per household is what worries me.
-
If a Democrat is elected, it will be worrisome. Especially since Hillary is proposing to add so many new jobs. At what cost?