Safely Retired Republicans - Baker, Shultz, Paulson - Propose Carbon Tax

[hatrack]

Good luck, guys - you're going to need it.

A coalition of veteran GOP officials — including five who have either served as treasury secretary or as chairs of the Council of Economic Advisers — will meet Wednesday with top White House officials to discuss the prospect of imposing a national carbon tax, rather than using federal regulations, to address climate change.

The newly formed Climate Leadership Council — which includes James A. Baker, Henry Paulson, George P. Shultz, Marty Feldstein and Greg Mankiw — is proposing elimination of nearly all of the Obama administration’s climate policies in exchange for a rising carbon tax that starts at $40 per ton and is returned in the form of a quarterly check from the Social Security Administration to every American.

EDIT

Despite the group’s impeccable Republican credentials — Baker, Paulson and Schultz served as treasury secretaries and Feldstein and Mankiw as CEA chairs, under GOP presidents — the proposal faces long odds. Many congressional Republicans are adamantly against a tax increase of any kind, and President Trump repeatedly emphasized he is far more interested in promoting the extraction of fossil fuels in United States than curbing the nation’s carbon emissions.

A proposed carbon tax also failed recently in a ballot initiative in Washington state, in part because it divided the environmental and social left — with many liberals wanting to use any revenue to invest in clean energy and other social causes rather than to return it to the public. Neither President Trump’s nor Vice President Pence’s spokespeople immediately responded to requests seeking comment on the carbon tax proposal, and Pence’s public schedule did not list the meeting with the group.

EDIT

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/07/senior-republican-leaders-propose-replacing-obamas-climate-plans-with-a-carbon-tax/?utm_term=.0bd5e1675a87

[nycbos]

1. OF course you have to be retired when you purpose a carbon tax.

To quote Sir Humphrey it is a courageous policy.

[Cicada]

2. Bottom 70% get rebates exceeding their costs, best idea ever

This tax gets paid back to all of us in quarterly dividend checks. At the initial $40 per ton tax, to be increased over time, the bottom 70% will get dividends exceeding their extra costs for tax on what we buy. Initially the dividend will be $2000 per year for a family of four. This tax is designed to reduce emissions more than all Obama programs combined. Emissions which generate products with high value will still happen but emissions with little economic value will be killed off. This Republican proposal is so smart, so good for us, so fair that elected Republicans will kill it in its crib.

This is far and away the biggest news story this year but it will probably be ignored.

The top Repub economists Feldstein and Mankiw are the lead authors. Dems need to go wild supporting this idea, stressing its authors are top Republicans.

[hatrack]

3. From TPM's article on the proposal (and yes, it's another fake-out):

The proposal from the Republicans would also protect fossil fuel companies from lawsuits charging that they hurt the environment, the Times reported.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/baker-republicans-carbon-tax

And there's the meat of the proposal -new legal protections for big oil.

Surprise!!!

[Cicada]

5. That legal immunity sucks but It is still a winning change

Carbon pollution hurts us vastly more than any legal damages we get. So if this is a price needed to get this passed I can live with that.

[OKIsItJustMe]

4. James Hansen has advocated a similar carbon "Tax and 100% Dividend" plan for several years now

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20080604_TaxAndDividend.pdf

…

Tax and 100% dividend can drive innovation and economic growth with a snowballing effect. Carbon emissions will plummet far faster than in top-down or Manhattan projects. A clean environment that supports all life on the planet can be restored.

“Carbon tax and 100% dividend” is spurred by the recent “carbon cap” discussion of Peter Barnes and others. Principles must be crystal clear and adhered to rigorously. A tax on coal, oil and gas is simple. It can be collected at the first point of sale within the country or at the last (e.g., at the gas pump), but it can be collected easily and reliably. You cannot hide coal in your purse; it travels in railroad cars that are easy to spot. “Cap”, in addition, is a euphemism that may do as much harm as good. The public is not stupid.

The entire carbon tax should be returned to the public, with a monthly deposit to their bank accounts, an equal share to each person (if no bank account provided, an annual check – social security number must be provided). No bureaucracy is needed to figure this out. If the initial carbon tax averages $1200 per person per year, $100 is deposited in each account each month (Detail: perhaps limit to four shares per family, with child shares being half-size, i.e., no marriage penalty but do not encourage population growth).

A carbon tax will raise energy prices, but lower and middle income people, especially, will find ways to reduce carbon emissions so as to come out ahead. Product demand will spur economic activity and innovation. The rate of infrastructure replacement, thus economic activity, can be modulated by how fast the carbon tax rate increases. Effects will permeate society. Food requiring lots of carbon emissions to produce and transport will become more expensive and vice versa – it is likely, e.g., that the UK will stop importing and exporting 15,000 tons of waffles each year. There will be a growing price incentive for life style changes needed for sustainable living.

…