The case for carbon taxes has long been compelling. With the recent steep fall in oil prices and associated declines in other energy prices, it has become overwhelming. There is room for debate about the size of the tax and about how the proceeds should be deployed. But there should be no doubt that, given the current zero tax rate on carbon, increased taxation would be desirable.
…Hmm, let me think about that for a secon Oh, Hell no. Thanks for your time, Larry. You can go back in the box, now.
This ad from the American Energy Alliance against Congressman Nick Rahall is not precisely subtle:
…which does not mean that it’s incorrect. Basically: in 2013 Rahall voted for the Progressive Caucus’s budget amendment. Said amendment relied on a carbon tax; carbon taxes are bad news to West Virginia coal miners, given that you tax things when you don’t want more of it; and Nick Rahall is apparently an idiot for thinking that this wouldn’t show up in an attack ad against him. It was certainly more or less predicted, back in 2013: Continue reading Nick Rahall (D, West Virginia) and the carbon tax.
Via Hot Air Headlines comes this tacit admission that all of that stuff about global warming that Obama pontificated about at his last Inauguration? Yeah, that was just what we call pillow talk, baby: “White House spokesman Jay Carney Jan. 23 deflated environmentalists’ hope of a major federal program to counter climate change, by declaring that the ‘we have no intention of proposing a carbon tax.'” Shocking, I know: truly, truly shocking… that Carney was being so uncharacteristically blunt and coherent. I can only assume that he has the flu – it’s a bad year for it – and the drugs are making Jay Carney talk and act all funny.
“I think the President has long supported congressional action on climate change,” Carney said Jan. 22. But “he looks at [climate control] in a more holistic way, and he will move forward in implementing some of the [regulatory and spending] actions that he took in the first term,” he said.