Thursday
Oct012009
Ohio Senator Advocates Climate Bills That Include Border Adjusted Carbon Fees
Thursday, October 1, 2009 at 5:35PM
By Julianne LaJeunesse - University of New Mexico
The Economic Policy Institute held a briefing Thursday with Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), environmentalists, and members of industries that would experience financial and physical changes under proposed climate change bills like the House-passed Waxman-Markey bill and the Kerry-Boxer "Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act."
During the briefing, Robert Scott of EPI talked about his recent report "Climate Change Policy—Border Adjustment Key to U.S. Trade and Manufacturing Jobs." He found an audience in Brown and Leo Gerard, President of the United Steelworkers, when he suggested that U.S. jobs and a competitive U.S. industry presence can be recognized through stronger bill language on "border adjustments" as found in the Waxman-Markey bill.
Border adjustments are fees that are charged to countries who use an unregulated amount of carbon to create exported products. That charge is used as a way to level the playing field for countries whose emissions are regulated.
Brown said he appreciated Waxman-Markey's included adjustments, but said the allowed level of presidential discretion in the bill is questionable.
"This needs to be done in a way that is automatic... not allows a president, whoever the president is in the years ahead, to have discretion on this," Brown said. "Because we know how presidents don't move very aggressively on protecting our national interests on manufacturing and trade."
Gerard agreed, saying the amount of presidential authority afforded in the Waxman-Markey needs to be brought back to Congress.
"We've had a terrible experience with presidential discretion for eight years with President Bush," Gerard said. "He exercised his discretion and it cost America tens of thousands of jobs."
In his report, Scott said that if Congress does not support legislation that maintains and improves U.S. competition for energy-intensive and trade-intensive manufacturing, the country could lose as many as 4 million jobs to countries like China and Asia.
Opponents of increasing government control of carbon emissions say that the United States isn't financially ready to divert its money toward greener jobs, particularly in energy-intensive industries such as steel, pulp and paper, glass and clay and nonmetallic mineral products.
According to the Americans for Tax Reform website, their reason for opposing the Waxman-Markey bill in particular, are because the bill "raises taxes on American families, increases the cost of energy, and eliminates American jobs."
The Economic Policy Institute held a briefing Thursday with Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), environmentalists, and members of industries that would experience financial and physical changes under proposed climate change bills like the House-passed Waxman-Markey bill and the Kerry-Boxer "Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act."
During the briefing, Robert Scott of EPI talked about his recent report "Climate Change Policy—Border Adjustment Key to U.S. Trade and Manufacturing Jobs." He found an audience in Brown and Leo Gerard, President of the United Steelworkers, when he suggested that U.S. jobs and a competitive U.S. industry presence can be recognized through stronger bill language on "border adjustments" as found in the Waxman-Markey bill.
Border adjustments are fees that are charged to countries who use an unregulated amount of carbon to create exported products. That charge is used as a way to level the playing field for countries whose emissions are regulated.
Brown said he appreciated Waxman-Markey's included adjustments, but said the allowed level of presidential discretion in the bill is questionable.
"This needs to be done in a way that is automatic... not allows a president, whoever the president is in the years ahead, to have discretion on this," Brown said. "Because we know how presidents don't move very aggressively on protecting our national interests on manufacturing and trade."
Gerard agreed, saying the amount of presidential authority afforded in the Waxman-Markey needs to be brought back to Congress.
"We've had a terrible experience with presidential discretion for eight years with President Bush," Gerard said. "He exercised his discretion and it cost America tens of thousands of jobs."
In his report, Scott said that if Congress does not support legislation that maintains and improves U.S. competition for energy-intensive and trade-intensive manufacturing, the country could lose as many as 4 million jobs to countries like China and Asia.
Opponents of increasing government control of carbon emissions say that the United States isn't financially ready to divert its money toward greener jobs, particularly in energy-intensive industries such as steel, pulp and paper, glass and clay and nonmetallic mineral products.
According to the Americans for Tax Reform website, their reason for opposing the Waxman-Markey bill in particular, are because the bill "raises taxes on American families, increases the cost of energy, and eliminates American jobs."
Reader Comments