Soon to be former Governor Palin’s column on cap and trade is in many ways emblematic of her public persona: firmly held free-market/conservative positions, a quasi-folksy style that appeals to some and annoys others, and the ability to make liberals froth about that woman in ways that would impress a Taliban illegal combatant. Which is probably directly related to her PAC raising an additional 200K after her resignation speech (H/T: Hot Air Headlines): it should be interesting to see how much she brings in when she starts actively stumping for GOP candidates in 2010*.
Moving back to the article, it is itself fairly familiar, to those following the attempts of the Democrats to inflict cap-and-trade on America without having to take responsibility for it afterward. It takes the reasonable note that, in a situation where we need to put more into the economy, cap-and-trade will take out more from it: more jobs lost, more regulations imposed, more costs to do business:
Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.
In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.
The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.
I sort of doubt that last sentence, actually – ‘supply-side economics’ is of Reagan, and the Left still distrusts all that was of Reagan (although we’ve taught them to hide it well). But if passed, cap-and-trade will certainly encourage wavering Republicans, moderates, independents, and the more reasonable liberals to start contemplating their personal interests when deciding who to vote for. As the Governor notes, this is all being condensed into a simple question: do we use our own energy resources for our own purposes, or do we rely on other countries to generate energy for us (with all the complications that result)? Her answer:
Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?
Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama’s energy cap-and-tax plan.
And that last sentence was almost certainly written with malice aforethought.
*I know that people are speculating on a third-party run; I’m not one of them. The practical impossibilities of replacing the Republican party with something else right at this moment are fairly obvious, and they should be more obvious to an Alaskan elected official with experience in third-party dynamics. Besides: while the Governor may have her problems with the Republican establishment, said establishment has never openly gone after her kids.
Crossposted to RedState.