PDA

View Full Version : Cap'n Trade - Login Your Facts Here




Cowlesy
06-27-2009, 11:22 AM
I am starting this thread to compile facts we discover about HR 2454 so that we can make our case to the zombie public about why they need to inundate the Senate with activism.

I found these on Minority Leader Boehner's blog.

http://www.johnboehner.house.gov/blog/

Homebuyers Beware. Trying to save up for a new home? You may have to save up a little longer for your purchase. The Democrats’ bill would dramatically increase new home costs by mandating California’s expensive new building codes for the entire nation. Immediately upon enactment, the Democrats’ bill would demand a 30 percent increase in energy efficiency for new construction. A couple of years later, the Democrats’ bill would require an additional 50 percent improvement. These numbers were chosen with no concern for cost to consumers or feasibility in implementation.

Homebuilders Beware. The Democrats’ bill imposes new mandatory regulations and civil penalties for homebuilders. If your state refuses to accept the stringent and costly California building codes, the federal government may assess penalties. And don’t get too comfortable with the new mandatory regulations because the Democrats’ bill allows for “consensus-based” codes to supplant those outlined in the bill. So, as soon as you’ve invested your hard-earned money to comply with the bill’s mandates, the rug could get pulled from underneath you. Translation? You’ll pony up more and more money.

Home Sellers Beware. Having a hard time selling your home? Here’s one more hurdle to jump: all homes sales are conditioned upon an energy audit and a new energy rating assessment and energy labeling program for your home that’s outlined in the Democrats’ bill. And if you thought you could improve your property with a fresh coat of paint and some granite counters? Think again! Now your home will be subjected to a new energy rating assessment and energy labeling program that will penalize you for older windows, original fixtures, and dated appliances. So the Democrats’ bill would bring down the value of your home!

New Lights No Matter the Cost. As early as 2012, the Democrats’ bill eliminates all existing lighting technology used in many outdoor lighting fleets (parking lots, stadiums, secured facilities like power plants and factories). Just as an example, switching to the mandated technology in the bill will cost one small utility about $30 million in annual revenue. So you now have to comply with the new mandates for new lighting? Hold the phone. It is not clear that a feasible alternative technology is available for every existing lighting application – regardless of cost – which could force some businesses to close.


Posts that serve to question why we are even bothering to fight this bill will be deleted. You of course are welcome to start a thread about why we should cross our arms and pout.

I've been scouring sites, but frankly I think people are still trying to hash through the text. It is daunting.

Liberty Rebellion
06-27-2009, 11:32 AM
Thanks for your hard work Cowlesy!

It would be great if we could get a printout or slimjim type thing to hand out to people once we get everything compiled

sluggo
06-27-2009, 11:37 AM
There was some bit about "Community groups" being given the power and resources to oversee the "greening" of low income areas.

I don't know the specifics, but I heard Boehner mention it.....

Also, excellent thread.

We should start threads for each state's subforum to coordinate the efforts to put pressure on our respective Senators.

DirtMcGirt
06-27-2009, 11:43 AM
Great thread- ( I actually think we should have a research forum where you just supply info to a topic)

http://ceolas.net/#cce5x

This is a very good link, ton of info, about half way down it begins to go into the Cap 'n trade proposal.

Excerpt- In conclusion

This is - as seen - hardly the first critical text on cap and trade, it is widely recognized as unworkable to lower carbon emissions, by commentators with widely different backgrounds, as any research will show.

Why then do politicians love cap and trade so much, with its complex way of achieving so little?
Perhaps precisely because of all the wheeling and dealing involved, which seems to be the guts of politics.
Most of the replies I receive from Congressmen highlight how they "achieved this for Kansas" or "achieved that for Kentucky" (not necessarily those regions) by sticking on some addendum to the proposal.
Talk about adding lipstick on a pig.
As said earlier, where's the focus on actually dealing with emissions - accepting they have to be dealt with - rather than on how to avoid dealing with them?
Where's the will to speak out against the whole rationale of the Waxman-Markey Bill, or indeed the preparatory Copenhagen negotiations, and to make the point that the emissions question could be handled entirely differently and indeed directly?


I found this link in the comments section of the Cap n' Trade Story in the Economist...
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13933204&source=features_box_main

JoshLowry
06-27-2009, 11:47 AM
These kinds of threads are highly needed. I think we can replace them with something even better though.

I've been thinking about it, but I am going to change the wiki to use software that mimics the wikipedia user interface. The one we have is unfamiliar to most internet users. (We will save what we have up there though.)

We need to start developing pages as a collective mind that people can easily link to and learn in layman's terms why a certain bill is bad, why the federal reserve needs to be audited, etc... etc...

Sort of the same way that the MIAC parody doc was put together by about twenty of us.

ItsTime
06-27-2009, 11:53 AM
These kinds of threads are highly needed. I think we can replace them with something even better though.

I've been thinking about it, but I am going to change the wiki to use software that mimics the wikipedia user interface. The one we have is unfamiliar to most internet users. (We will save what we have up there though.)

We need to start developing pages as a collective mind that people can easily link to and learn in layman's terms why a certain bill is bad, why the federal reserve needs to be audited, etc... etc...

Sort of the same way that the MIAC parody doc was put together by about twenty of us.

good idea. wiki.libertyforest.com or something like that?

Liberty Rebellion
06-27-2009, 11:55 AM
These kinds of threads are highly needed. I think we can replace them with something even better though.

I've been thinking about it, but I am going to change the wiki to use software that mimics the wikipedia user interface. The one we have is unfamiliar to most internet users. (We will save what we have up there though.)

We need to start developing pages as a collective mind that people can easily link to and learn in layman's terms why a certain bill is bad, why the federal reserve needs to be audited, etc... etc...

Sort of the same way that the MIAC parody doc was put together by about twenty of us.

Josh, regarding the bolded above: We have a wiki?:confused:

klamath
06-27-2009, 12:17 PM
I am starting this thread to compile facts we discover about HR 2454 so that we can make our case to the zombie public about why they need to inundate the Senate with activism.

I found these on Minority Leader Boehner's blog.

http://www.johnboehner.house.gov/blog/

Homebuyers Beware. Trying to save up for a new home? You may have to save up a little longer for your purchase. The Democrats’ bill would dramatically increase new home costs by mandating California’s expensive new building codes for the entire nation. Immediately upon enactment, the Democrats’ bill would demand a 30 percent increase in energy efficiency for new construction. A couple of years later, the Democrats’ bill would require an additional 50 percent improvement. These numbers were chosen with no concern for cost to consumers or feasibility in implementation.

Homebuilders Beware. The Democrats’ bill imposes new mandatory regulations and civil penalties for homebuilders. If your state refuses to accept the stringent and costly California building codes, the federal government may assess penalties. And don’t get too comfortable with the new mandatory regulations because the Democrats’ bill allows for “consensus-based” codes to supplant those outlined in the bill. So, as soon as you’ve invested your hard-earned money to comply with the bill’s mandates, the rug could get pulled from underneath you. Translation? You’ll pony up more and more money.

Home Sellers Beware. Having a hard time selling your home? Here’s one more hurdle to jump: all homes sales are conditioned upon an energy audit and a new energy rating assessment and energy labeling program for your home that’s outlined in the Democrats’ bill. And if you thought you could improve your property with a fresh coat of paint and some granite counters? Think again! Now your home will be subjected to a new energy rating assessment and energy labeling program that will penalize you for older windows, original fixtures, and dated appliances. So the Democrats’ bill would bring down the value of your home!

New Lights No Matter the Cost. As early as 2012, the Democrats’ bill eliminates all existing lighting technology used in many outdoor lighting fleets (parking lots, stadiums, secured facilities like power plants and factories). Just as an example, switching to the mandated technology in the bill will cost one small utility about $30 million in annual revenue. So you now have to comply with the new mandates for new lighting? Hold the phone. It is not clear that a feasible alternative technology is available for every existing lighting application – regardless of cost – which could force some businesses to close.


Posts that serve to question why we are even bothering to fight this bill will be deleted. You of course are welcome to start a thread about why we should cross our arms and pout.

I've been scouring sites, but frankly I think people are still trying to hash through the text. It is daunting.

Good thread Cowlesy. If anyone can get the actual text of the bill so that we can post the bills paragraph and line numbers that enact these mandates it will hold more weight when trying to convince people. This way people are less likely to dismiss the charges as partisan scare tactics.

The national building code part could start a big firestorm in states like Idaho and Montana that are happy with not having a lot of building codes.

Cowlesy
06-27-2009, 12:19 PM
Good thread Cowlesy. If anyone can get the actual text of the bill so that we can post the bills paragraph and line numbers that enact these mandates it will hold more weight when trying to convince people. This way people are less likely to dismiss the charges as partisan scare tactics.

The national building code part could start a big firestorm in states like Idaho and Montana that are happy with not having a lot of building codes.

I agree -- even the items I posted above could have a partisan bend to them. I have requested Boehner's staff come up with cited bullet-points from his time on the floor yesterday --- we'll see if they play ball.

sluggo
06-27-2009, 12:25 PM
Here's the bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454

JoshLowry
06-27-2009, 01:14 PM
Josh, regarding the bolded above: We have a wiki?:confused:

Yes, it is in the top blue bar in between the Chat Room and New Posts.

It would be beneficial because then one person isn't tasked for keeping a certain topic up to date.

pahs1994
06-27-2009, 02:47 PM
The wiki gets lost up there. Would it be more visable if you put a link in the "Start Here" section of the forums where the forum guidelines are located on the main page also?

I am not usually one for crowding the forums as there is alot on the main page now but if it was more visable it might help.

DirtMcGirt
06-27-2009, 02:58 PM
Here's Congressman Boehner's crazy ass chart he was trying to explain at the beginning of his speech... He must have been working like a madman to put this and his talking points together on such short notice.


http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/2350/boehnercapandtradechart.jpg (http://img199.imageshack.us/i/boehnercapandtradechart.jpg/) http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/boehnercapandtradechart.jpg/1/w476.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img199/boehnercapandtradechart.jpg/1/)

Lord Xar
06-27-2009, 03:27 PM
These kinds of threads are highly needed. I think we can replace them with something even better though.

I've been thinking about it, but I am going to change the wiki to use software that mimics the wikipedia user interface. The one we have is unfamiliar to most internet users. (We will save what we have up there though.)

We need to start developing pages as a collective mind that people can easily link to and learn in layman's terms why a certain bill is bad, why the federal reserve needs to be audited, etc... etc...

Sort of the same way that the MIAC parody doc was put together by about twenty of us.


I'd like someplace I can "link" to. I am dissuaded from posting many articles because of where they reside, sometimes. If there is a place that I can link to, to inform people, that would be great.

oilboiler
06-27-2009, 03:32 PM
Here is a tabulation from the Heritage Foundation, tabulating the loss of per capita income by congressional district...

http://shimkus.house.gov/uploads/Cap-and-Tax%20Impact%20by%20Congressional%20District.pdf

JasonC
06-27-2009, 03:34 PM
Well, I did hear on Fox Biz channel that New Zealand passed their own Cap and trade bill, and they are either trying to get rid of it or have already repealed it-- I forget which one. It appears to have done much harm to the NZ economy.

I do not have time to get specific links to facts, but I will try to get some before the weekend is over--unless someone else wants to look...... team work people.

t0rnado
06-27-2009, 04:16 PM
I just decided to start reading at a random section of the bill and found some interesting stuff


(3) BREAKTHROUGH TECHNOLOGIES.—The Administration shall charge the minimum amount in fees or compensation practicable for breakthrough technologies, consistent with the long-term viability of the Administration, unless the Administration first determines that a higher charge will not impede the development of the technology. - Page 275

They're going to punish people for innovation.


(2) STATE LAW.—The Administrator of the Administration may conduct the business of the Administration without regard to any qualification or law of any State relating to incorporation.

Yay! Nullification of states rights!

Mirror of the PDF. (http://unelected.org/uploads/HR2454.pdf) Download it because it will crash your browser.

Cowlesy
06-27-2009, 05:36 PM
http://www.rules.house.gov/111/SpecialRules/hr2998/waxman1_hr2998_111.pdf

Above is a link to a PDF of the Waxman 300 page boondoggle amendment that was included in the bill at 3:09AM on Friday.

nayjevin
07-02-2009, 10:48 PM
What's the status on this?

nbruno322
07-02-2009, 10:53 PM
Cap and Trade Tax = Modern, More Oppressive Stamp Act Tax