Contact for Interviews: <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Richard Morrison, 202.331.2273
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Washington, D.C., March 30, 2004—Today in the U.S. House of Representatives a version of the Senate’s Lieberman-McCain Climate Stewardship Act is being introduced that would create restrictions on the emission of carbon dioxide and other gases in the name of combating global warming. If made law, these restrictions would amount to a stealth tax on consumers. Progressively steeper restrictions on emission levels, as planned by backers of the proposal, would create a system of energy rationing that would raise prices through all sectors of the economy.
“Today’s global warming grandstanding by a few members of the House is a call for higher energy prices at a time when the Congress should be taking actions to increase energy supplies and lower prices,” said Myron Ebell, Director of Global Warming Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “If consumers like the current high gasoline prices and all-time-high natural gas prices, then they will love this bill because it will make high energy prices permanent. The next step will be to raise energy prices higher and higher.”
By raising the cost of energy through suppression of carbon dioxide, an emissions cap would become an expensive exercise in futility. Any system set up in the United States would have virtually no impact on global CO2 levels because of massive increases expected from developing countries. Moreover, the scientific assumptions underlying global warming alarmism appear increasingly doubtful. Experts agree that the proposed emissions limits would have no detectable effect on the climate at all.
The bill being introduced into the House is similar to S. 139, the Climate Stewardship Act, sponsored by Senators Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) and John McCain (R-AZ), which was defeated on the Senate floor last fall.