Below is a comment posted to an article on the website Climate Progress on July 11, 2010.
I have just finished Eric Pooley’s book “The Climate War”. This shows the enormous difficulty of designing and adopting complicated energy legislation in Congress that will actually do some good. The House bill passed last year might meet that standard, but it is highly unlikely that anything produced by the Senate this year would be better than nothing. In the process of getting a bill, there would be irresponsible deals like the one cut with Senator Ben Nelson for health care. As with health care, this would increase public opposition to a program we really need.
The public wants Washington to focus on the economy this year. Jobs and mortgages are more important than climate change.
I believe we need a bold national program to phase out fossil fuels and build a sustainable 21st century economy. The most visible reason today is the tragic oil spill in the Gulf. The most important reason is to slow climate change. There are many others.
This program should be our first priority. Because this program will stimulate new technologies and generate good American jobs, I call it “ReEnergize America.”
A bold program needs a bold leader. I have written to President Obama and urged him to call for the program to ReEnergize America. Set the goal to stop burning fossil fuel by 2050. Declare the rest of 2010 to be period for national dialog on the program and the means to implement it. It can become an issue in the fall elections. It can reenergize those who supported him in 2008. Call for enabling legislation from Congress in early 2011.
By doing this the president will provide the leadership for the energy issue that many believe is needed. At the same time he will let Congress off the hook for energy legislation this year.
The legislation currently being considered rests on a system of carbon cap-and-trade. This is complicated and makes many concessions to special interests. The public will probably see it as unfair and will not support it. This legislation should be withdrawn.
Many business leaders and economists believe that the best way to discourage the use of fossil fuels is to raise their prices. If done slowly and steadily in a way that provides clear price signals over the long term, all participants in the economy can plan and respond constructively. For many years this fee has been called a carbon tax.
A tax is a political non-starter today. A better proposal is for a carbon fee-and-dividend. Impose a fee on all fossil fuels, collect it at the source (mine, well, port of entry), and return the revenues to the people as dividends.
Legislation designed in 2011 should rest on carbon fee-and-dividend and not include cap-and-trade. It should be simple and make no concessions to special interests. This system has many advantages relative to current legislation. Most important: It will be fair and the public will see it that way.
It will be difficult to get a good energy bill thru Congress. With public support in 2011 this will be more likely than today.
If President Obama leads, Americans will follow. If America leads, the world will follow.
Bill Allen, 07-11-10