While reading Alan Murray’s recent column in the Wall Street Journal, about business support of a market-based carbon cap, I came across this fascinating paragraph: “The problem is that it isn’t clear Democratic leaders really want to act. Their eyes are fixed on the 2008 election, when they hope global warming will be a potent political issue. They are reluctant to pass any legislation that the president will sign. Instead, some Democrats apparently think they’d do better politically if they forced a veto.”¯
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Wait a minute! I thought that global warming was the most pressing issue of our time? I mean, that’s what Al Gore’s celebrated film has taught us, right? Democratic members of Congress have been beating that drum ever since its release.
But now that business leaders have come out in support of a carbon cap, have Democrats suddenly changed their tune? Perhaps Democrats just don’t want to support anything that the business community supports. After all, the big corporations that support a carbon cap obviously believe it will help them make money, and we all know that Democrats hate to see big corporations do well.
The fact of the matter is that a carbon cap will help the economy - it will spur the development of more efficient sources of energy, produce innovative new technologies, and lead to greater energy security. Corporations like GE, BP, and Alcoa wouldn’t be supporting it otherwise. And if the Democrats want to stand in the way of this progress in order to score some cheap political points on the global warming issue, well, maybe they ought to place their bets on Al Gore winning the Oscar rather than on their keeping their Congressional majority.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 20th, 2007 at 2:25 pm and is filed under Cap and Trade, Climate Change, Politics/Government . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:13 pm
A carbon cap will help the economy? Corporations are supprting it because it will spur more efficient sources of energy….??? What is this guy smoking? I would suggest that Alan Murray study the history of government regulation of industry, be it the rail roads, trucking, utilities, etc. Regulation always goes through the same stages. First, it is fought tooth and nail. Second, when it begins to appear that regulation is going to happen, the corporations suddenly support it. Last, when Congress starts drafting legislation, the corporations lobby Congress to get the regulations written in a manner which profits them the most and makes it cost prohibitive for others to get into the business. We are now at the second phase.
All businesses want the same thing, that is to make more money. A small business has to rely on inovation, marketing and luck to make money. A big business has other options. They can afford to lobby Congress to pass laws which give them a competitive edge, they can afford to move to other countries or otherwise work in the international arena to skirt domestic regulation and taxes. This is what the carbon cap offers these companies. So if I invent a better mouse trap and I want to build a mouse trap factory I now have to buy carbon credits since I am a new polluter. From whom do I buy them? Well maybe GE closes a factory and now has spare carbon credits which they can sell to me. Plus they just open a new factory in the Congo or some such place which doest have a carbon cap and where the government will pay for the factory with a World Bank loan.
I think I will go now and sell Alan a bridge.