Letters to the Editor and other People Speak
FROM-The Chatanoogan
Zach Wamp: Cap And Trade Is Bad For American Competitiveness
Cap-and-trade is nothing more than a big regulatory scheme that will burden the American people with a new national energy tax. Outside estimates say this climate legislation would cost the average household more than $1,800 a year. If you don’t believe this prediction, look at what is happening in Britain where the average family is already paying nearly $1,300 a year in taxes to reduce carbon-emissions. The thought of a substantial tax increase is especially troubling for Americans who are already struggling financially during this economic downturn.
We have the knowledge base, innovation and free enterprise system to solve our environmental and energy challenges without these huge regulations. Properly investing in the energy sector can create new technologies and manufacturing opportunities to bolster our country’s competitiveness.
For more than 10 years, I’ve championed conservation and renewable energies, introducing and passing legislation to provide the best incentives for families and businesses to invest in alternative energy. But, in the Southeast United States renewable energy only generates a small fraction of the available electricity and a ‘cap-and-tax’ plot will have adverse effects on our state.
The Republican alternative is an all-of-the-above solution that includes the bold nuclear energy agenda that is necessary to meet the growing demand for electricity and reduce emissions. Nothing would do more for our economy and create more jobs than to build 100 new nuclear reactors in the next 20 years. The Department of Energy has stated that nuclear energy is the most effective way to reduce carbon emissions, yet it has been left out of the Democrats’ bill. If we really want to take a global leadership role on climate change and carbon reduction, we must produce more electricity from nuclear power.
More...
Zach Wamp: Cap And Trade Is Bad For American Competitiveness
Cap-and-trade is nothing more than a big regulatory scheme that will burden the American people with a new national energy tax. Outside estimates say this climate legislation would cost the average household more than $1,800 a year. If you don’t believe this prediction, look at what is happening in Britain where the average family is already paying nearly $1,300 a year in taxes to reduce carbon-emissions. The thought of a substantial tax increase is especially troubling for Americans who are already struggling financially during this economic downturn.
We have the knowledge base, innovation and free enterprise system to solve our environmental and energy challenges without these huge regulations. Properly investing in the energy sector can create new technologies and manufacturing opportunities to bolster our country’s competitiveness.
For more than 10 years, I’ve championed conservation and renewable energies, introducing and passing legislation to provide the best incentives for families and businesses to invest in alternative energy. But, in the Southeast United States renewable energy only generates a small fraction of the available electricity and a ‘cap-and-tax’ plot will have adverse effects on our state.
The Republican alternative is an all-of-the-above solution that includes the bold nuclear energy agenda that is necessary to meet the growing demand for electricity and reduce emissions. Nothing would do more for our economy and create more jobs than to build 100 new nuclear reactors in the next 20 years. The Department of Energy has stated that nuclear energy is the most effective way to reduce carbon emissions, yet it has been left out of the Democrats’ bill. If we really want to take a global leadership role on climate change and carbon reduction, we must produce more electricity from nuclear power.
More...
No comments:
Post a Comment