NH INSIDER

Obama Treasury Dept Still Hiding Info on Global Warming ‘Cap-and-Tax’ Costs

Admissions of Job Losses & Hundreds of Billions in Cost Insufficient; CEI to Sue

Washington, D.C., September 29, 2009— The Competitive Enterprise Institute today notified the Treasury Department of CEI’s intent to sue for the administration’s inadequate disclosure of documents addressing its expectations of and intentions for a global warming “cap-and-trade” plan. CEI’s notice of intent to sue was contained in an appeal filed today with the agency.  

The cost estimates running as high as $300 billion per year contained in the few documents released by Treasury two weeks ago set off a political firestorm. Such cost estimates were far above the government’s public estimates and previously hidden from the public. The higher figures and other expected impacts were revealed only after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents request by CEI Senior Fellow Christopher Horner.  

The agency responded to CEI’s requests, after months of delay, by producing a mere five documents. Initially, even those documents were released with politically embarrassing portions blacked out. Days later, the same documents were re-released without the blacked out portions, but still not in their entirety.  

 “Your response fails any reasonable test for compliance with FOIA and constitutes an effective denial of our request,” stated Horner, in the notice of appeal filed today.  

Documents released by Treasury on September 18 revealed:

Internal agency estimates of a crushing blow to manufacturing jobs and that a global warming cap-and-trade plan could hit $300 billion annually, while raising billions in revenue to fund various programs.

Treasury estimates that “domestic policies to address climate change and the related issues of energy security and affordability will involve significant costs and potential revenues, possibly up to several percentage points of annual GDP (i.e. equal in size to the corporate income tax).”; and that

Treasury believes that carbon regulation “may result in loss of domestic and international market shares for U.S. companies, and relocation of U.S. firms abroad, representing both a political problem and an environmental problem” singling out how “energy-intensive sectors, such as the steel, aluminum, paper, chemicals, and cement industries, where imports are ready substitutes and lower carbon technologies are not widely available, are clearly vulnerable.”

Heeding President Obama’s call for such a scheme, a cap-and-trade plan already passed the House as part of the Waxman-Markey bill.  Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and John Kerry (D-Mass) plan to introduce their version this week. Both approaches require Americans to purchase energy use “allowances” and amount to a large tax on energy and the cost of all goods, given the energy required to produce and bring them to market. As a candidate, Obama expressed his intention to use cap-and-trade to cause Americans’ energy costs to “necessarily skyrocket.” 

Treasury’s response to date and CEI’s Appeal and Notice of Intent to Sue reveal how the administration is still not being straight with Congress and the American people about this.  

> Read more about CEI’s Appeal and Notice of Intent to Sue  

> Read more about CEI’s FOIA request

>Read more by Christopher Horner, author of Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed

Treasury Dept Releases Un-redacted Documents Friday Afternoon

Washington, D.C., September 18, 2009 - Global warming cap and trade costs could hit $300 billion annually, the Treasury Department admitted in documents released today – late in the afternoon and on the day of the Jewish New Year celebration.  The same documents had been released by Treasury earlier this week but had important parts redacted.  Now, the document is available in its entirety for public scrutiny. 

The new information reveals that Treasury estimates that not only could cap and trade cost $300 billion annually, “domestic policies to address climate change and the related issues of energy security and affordability will involve significant costs and potential revenues, possibly up to several percentage points of annual GDP (i.e. equal in size to the corporate income tax).”

The documents were obtained by CEI Senior Fellow Christopher Horner through a Freedom of Information Act request and revealed in a Friday afternoon release after public attention to an earlier version raised questions of what the administration was hiding.

 “Today's release explains why the administration initially sought to keep its internal aspirations and expectations from the public: The cost of a cap-and-trade plan to businesses and consumers will be enormous,” said Horner.  "This candid perspective of what could prove to be the biggest tax increase in our nation's history now must be openly debated before the American public".

A cap-and-trade plan, as called for by President Obama, would either immediately sell all carbon dioxide emission permits or sell nearly all after a few years of giving industry most of its permits for free.

> View the Treasury Department documents

> Read more:

Energy Ration Coupons Cost A Mint - Even When They’re Given Away for “Free” - Sept. 17

Big Green Fury & Bile Belies Big Green Fabrications - Sept. 17

Just Breaking - Sept. 18 

Cap-and-Trade = Mega-Billion Tax, No Matter How It's Sliced

Washington, D.C., September 17, 2009 - Internal Treasury Department documents released this week confirm the Obama administration’s expectations for a nationwide global warming “cap and trade” plan.  The documents were obtained by CEI Senior Fellow Christopher Horner through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Internally, Treasury indicates it expects that the sort of plan that the president is calling for – a plan that either immediately auctions off carbon dioxide emission permits or sells nearly all after a few years of giving industry most of its permits for free – would bring from $100-200 billion per year in revenue for the government.

That is money taken either directly from household and business energy consumers, according to the Congressional Budget Office when it was headed by Obama's budget director, Peter Orszag. (See Orszag statement.) Those billions translate into between one and two thousand dollars per year for the average household. 

 “The cost of a cap-and-trade plan to businesses and consumers will be huge, which the Treasury Department internally acknowledges,” said Horner.  "The documents represent what the administration expects ‘cap and trade’ to cost, and raise. It's a candid perspective that must be told with as much openness to the American public as administration staff discuss with each other. Therefore, we call on the administrationAdministration to immediately release complete, un-redacted copies of these documents for all to see. No more hiding.”

There is one difference between the White House plan and the plan that passed the U.S. House this year which ends up also auctioning off three-fourths of the emission permits, while giving away the rest to politically favored-entities for resale to the productive sector, which is that the White House plan would auction them all off immediately. The House found that too politically difficult and gave away many of the permits for the first few years. Both schemes, however, include selling the allowances to fund government spending, notwithstanding claims to the contrary by supporters of the idea that auctioning has been ”scrapped.”

”CBO, under Obama's now-budget director, makes clear that the outcome for the American taxpayer remains the same,” said Horner. ”It doesn't matter who gets the money in the first few years or ever- -- whether 85 percent are at first given away to special interests, or 100 percent immediately goes to the government – it still comes out the taxpayer’s pocket.”

> View pdf FOIA documents from the U.S. Treasury  

>  View statement by Christopher Horner, Big Green Fury & Bile Belie Big Green Fabrications

ALG News is pleased to report that H.R. 1207, a bill that would audit the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and regional Reserve Banks, is picking up real steam. In the past two days alone, the bill has picked up 18 new cosponsors, including House Republican Leader John Boehner. As usual, ALG News will keep you apprised of updates on this developing story.

Defending America's First Amendment
Will the next great threat to Free Speech come from overseas?

America's Green Oasis: Washington, D.C.
While the nation is put out of work, government is getting greener, meaner, and of course—bigger.

Timmy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
If Congress fails to act to rein in the Fed, as Ludwig von Mises once said, "Money, like chocolate in a hot oven, [will be] melting in the pockets of people."

Once, We Would Have Called It a Scandal
Newt Gingrich illustrates how the White House, through GM and Chrysler, have wound up using tax dollars to pay off a political contributor—the UAW.

Editorial: Equal Justice—Or Hypocrisy as Usual
Tom Coburn thinks that if tobacco is to be regulated by the FDA, so should medical marijuana.

Full Faith and Credit?
When Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told Chinese students at Peking University that "Chinese assets are very safe," they had the common sense to laugh in his face.

The Same Old Game
Michael Steele might be able to learn a thing or two from former Senator Fred Thompson.

American capitalism gone with a whimper
When the Russians start noting your nation's descent into Marxism, you know you're in trouble.