From Larry Bell's column in Forbes:
As my respected friend Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) notes, “During the cap-and-trade debate in the last Congress, there was something of a consensus among economists that EPA regulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is the worst [carbon attack] option, a ‘comprehensive legislative solution’ (i.e. cap-and-trade) has less economic risk, and a carbon tax is the most efficient option. But the ‘progressives’ in the “’Price Carbon Campaign’ are pushing for taxes on top of EPA regulation.” Yet why would any informed government representative support any of those “options”? Doing so is completely senseless for a variety of reasons.