Democrate to raises taxes for global warming

This forum is for the discussion of topics of political nature that affect the duning community.

Moderator: Sitewide Forum Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Winston Cup
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 4270
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2000 11:05 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: High Desert

Democrate to raises taxes for global warming

Post by Winston Cup »

Now who's actually surprised about this? This is what it's always been about. Another sham reason to raise taxes, and pass more legislation to gain more control over peoples lives.
Plan Uses Taxes to Fight Climate Change

By H. JOSEF HEBERT
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 26, 2007; 7:34 PM

WASHINGTON -- Dealing with global warming will be painful, says one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. To back up his claim he is proposing a recipe many people won't like _ a 50-cent gasoline tax, a carbon tax and scaling back tax breaks for some home owners.

"I'm trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it's going to have a measure of pain that you're not going to like," Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.

Dingell will offer a "discussion draft" outlining his tax proposals on Thursday, the same day that President Bush holds a two-day conference to discuss voluntary efforts to combat climate change.

But Dingell, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that will craft climate legislation, is making it clear that he believes tackling global warming will require a lot more if it is to be taken seriously.

"This is going to cause pain," he said, adding that he wants to make certain "the pain is shared in a way that is fair, proper, acceptable and accomplishes the basic purpose" of reducing greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.

Dingell said he's not sure what the final climate package will include when the House takes it up for a vote. The taxes measures he's proposing, in fact, will be taken up by another House committee. And the Senate is considering a market-based system that would set an economy-wide ceiling on the amount of carbon dioxide that would be allowed to be released.

Dingell says he hasn't rule out such a so-called "cap-and-trade" system, either, but that at least for now he wants to float what he believes is a better idea. He will propose for discussion:

_A 50-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline and jet fuel, phased in over five years, on top of existing taxes.

_A tax on carbon, at $50 a ton, released from burning coal, petroleum or natural gas.

_Phaseout of the interest tax deduction on home mortgages for homes over 3,000 square feet. Owners would keep most of the deduction for homes at the lower end of the scale, but it would be eliminated entirely for homes of 4,200 feet or more.

He estimates that would affect 10 percent of homeowners. He says "it's only fair" to tax those who buy large suburban houses and create urban sprawl. Historic and farm houses would be exempted.

Some of the revenue would be used to reduce payroll taxes, but most would go elsewhere including for highway construction, mass transit, paying for Social Security and health programs and to help the poor pay energy bills.

In the interview Wednesday, Dingell acknowledged he's tackling some of the most sacred of political cows. He's not sure if they will end up in the climate legislation, but he wants to open them for discussion.

"All my friends tell me you can't do this, it's going to be political poison," said Dingell, 81, who has served longer in the House than any of his colleagues and heads one of the chamber's most powerful committees.

Widely known for protecting the automakers who are so prominent in his state, the Michigan Democrat first raised the tax ideas this summer. Some people immediately suggested he was offering proposals he knows won't pass to sidestep other issues such as automobile fuel economy increases.

Dingell rejects such criticism and said he wants to trigger "an intelligent discussion of the whole question."

Many economists have long maintained that a carbon tax is a more-efficient, less-bureaucratic way to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide than a cap-and-trade system, which could be difficult to administer.

A carbon tax would impact everything from the cost of electricity to winter heating and add to the cost of gasoline and other motor fuels. But economists say a cap on carbon also would raise these costs as burning fossil fuels becomes more expensive.

Such tax proposals have gained little traction.

Rep. Pete Starke, D-Calif., has been trying unsuccessfully to get a carbon tax for 16 years. In the early 1990s the House passed a modest "BTU" tax on the heat content of fuels, only to have it die in the Senate. Dingell acknowledged that there are still people who blame the Democrats' loss of Congress in 1994 on the ill-fated tax.

The federal 18.4-cent gasoline tax also has been a subject of discussion, but not about increasing it. As gasoline prices soared above $3 a gallon last year a chorus of lawmakers called for suspending the tax.

© 2007 The Associated Press
Guy Chrest

Image

User avatar
GlamisLovingFool
4th Gear Member
4th Gear Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:16 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Rancho Cucamonga CA

Post by GlamisLovingFool »

This is funny. It seems they are jumping the gun and need to base this decision on some real science.
Josh Hashim - 08 Yamaha Raptor 700
Maria - 04 Honda 400 EX
Jonah - 2007 12V Powerwheels Batman Edition
2008 23' WW Superlite

crash
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 3915
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 7:31 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: USA

Post by crash »

Let me see if I have this plan figured out. Keep increasing taxes on those that work so the government can give those that don't work, essentially, free energy.(?) :shock: :? All this to try and solve a problem that may not even exist. Sometimes I really can't believe the Democratic party even exists! :( Although I must say, I am glad they are there to keep the Republicans in check. :wink:

User avatar
MattV
6th Gear "Wide Open" Member
6th Gear "Wide Open" Member
Posts: 1052
Joined: Fri May 04, 2001 10:33 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: USA

Post by MattV »

The science does not matter to these people. The taxes proposed have NOTHING to do with climate change, it's simply the latest vehicle to put forth their socialist agenda. Look at where the money will go. Looks like $0.00 for research into alternative energy sources, more efficient electricity generation or anything else even remotely related to this supposed problem. The bulk of the money, it appears, would be used to prop up existing social programs that the federal government has no place in implementing anyway.

A good thing they're there to keep the Republicans in check? God forbid we have lower taxes, and a cessation of subsidizing the poor financial planning of others.

Matt
Water is just beer that hasn't reached its full potential.

User avatar
MR. PETE
4th Gear Member
4th Gear Member
Posts: 226
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2003 11:52 am

Post by MR. PETE »

Winston Cup wrote:
...Another sham reason to raise taxes, and pass more legislation to gain more control over peoples lives.
Simple and true.

From the article:
"I'm trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it's going to have a measure of pain that you're not going to like," Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.

FIFTY-TWO YEARS?

After 52 years, haven’t they/we all had enough Dingle in DC?

A vote for a liberal of any party affiliation is a vote for the destruction of the traditional American value of freedom that is and has been the foundation of this country for over two hundred years.

Excessive taxation is immoral and erodes freedom. The abridgement of freedom by any actual state is morally unacceptable.

Politians that do not fear removal from office will always end up taking as much money as they can from the very people that they have sworn to serve.

Fortunately, I do not believe that this taxation will garner any of the required support in Congress to become law anytime soon.

But we can be sure that it will not go away...
______________
Peter

crash
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 3915
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 7:31 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: USA

Post by crash »

God help us (because no one else will be able to at that point) if Hillary or Obama, or for that matter any dem, gets into the white house next. The Dems will control it all, and while I thought the Reps somewhat misused their reign of domination the last few years, it will pale in comparison to what the Dems hit us citizens with. Socialism here we come!! :cry:

Post Reply

Return to “Political Discussions Only”