Gov. Mitch Daniels: Wrong On Cap-And-Trade

May 29, 2009 6:37 pm ET

In the Republican radio address set to air on Saturday May 30th, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels repeats numerous debunked GOP talking points.

Gov. Daniels Falsely States Cap-And-Trade Would Double Electric Bills

Gov. Mitch Daniels: "The national energy tax imposed by Speaker Pelosi's climate change bill would double electric bills here in Indiana, working a severe hardship on low-income families, but that's only where the damage starts.  In a state where we like to make things, like steel and autos and RVs, it would cost us countless jobs, many of them heading off-shore to China and India.  Our farmers and livestock producers would see their costs skyrocket.  And our coal miners would be looking for new work, while we leave affordable, homegrown energy idle in the ground." [Republican Radio Address, 5/30/09]

A Clean Energy Standard Would Save $95 Billion On Energy & Gas Bills.  According to the Center for American Progress: "A national renewable electricity standard, a key piece of the clean energy legislation currently before Congress, would save households and businesses in every state billions of dollars in electricity and natural gas bills... The numbers come from the Union of Concerned Scientists, who earlier this year analyzed a renewable electricity standard that would aim to have 25 percent of our electricity come from renewable sources by 2025. They found that this standard would save families and businesses $95 billion in electricity and natural gas bills through 2030 and spur new investments and hundreds of thousands of new clean-energy jobs." [Center for American Progress, 5/19/09]

Even Before Markup, The EPA Estimated Cap-And-Trade Bill Would Cost Less Than $150 Annually.  According to the Wall Street Journal: "The Environmental Protection Agency presented its analysis of the Waxman-Markey bill on Tuesday and said the contentious plan would cost households less than $150 a year.  That's a far cry from some of the dueling price tags that have been bandied about." [Wall Street Journal, 4/21/09; emphasis added]

  • EPA: Markup Changes In Bill Decrease "The Impact On Household Energy Bills." According to an EPA report: "The change in early-year cap levels lowers allowance prices slightly. In the draft bill, the year-2020 emissions cap for covered sources was set at 20% below the year-2005 level. In H.R. 2454, the year-2020 cap is changed to 17% below the year-2005 level. (The 2012, 2030, and 2050 targets remain the same.) That relaxation of the cap, by itself, will lower allowance prices by 3%. Accordingly, that single change will lower the cost of the legislation for households, in part by lowering the impact on household energy bills." [EPA, accessed 5/27/09; emphasis and parentheses original]

Cap-And Trade Is Good For The Environment

Gov. Mitch Daniels: "And all for what?  Even if one believes the Administration's own computer models, which they claim can predict temperatures fifty years away, the CO2 reductions from their bill will not budge the world thermometer by a tenth of a degree." [Republican Radio Address, 5/30/09]

American Clean Energy And Security Act Would Cut 1.2 Billion Metric Tons Of C02.  According to the World Resources Institute, the American Clean Energy And Security Act would cut 1.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2020.  [World Resources Institute via Center for American Progress, 5/14/09]

American Clean Energy And Security Act Would Be The Equivalent Of Taking 500 Million Cars Off The Road.  As noted by the Center for American Progress: "That translates into a cut of 1.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2020 compared to inaction, according to a projection based on an analysis by the World Resources Institute. This is comparable to taking 500 million cars off the road, which is twice the number of U.S. cars today, and half the cars expected in the world in 2020." [Center for American Progress, 5/14/09]

WHO: "Climate Change Will Affect, In Profoundly Adverse Ways, Some Of The Most Fundamental Determinants Of Health." According to the Sydney Morning Herald: "'Climate change will affect, in profoundly adverse ways, some of the most fundamental determinants of health: food, air, water,' the director-general of the World Health Organisation, Margaret Chan, says." [Sydney Morning Herald, 5/7/09]

Investment In Clean Energy Is Good For The Economy

Gov. Mitch Daniels: "There is tremendous risk in being pushed into an unfair and ultimately counterproductive national energy tax that will cost us dollars today and jobs tomorrow." [Republican Radio Address, 5/30/09]

 Investment In Clean Energy Technology Will Create Over 1.5 Million American Jobs.  According to the Center for American Progress, a $100 billion Green Recovery program would create 1,578, 282 American jobs. [Center for American Progress, "Green Recovery," September 2008]

  • Indiana Alone Would Gain More Than 43,000 Jobs From Increased Investment In Clean Energy. According to the Center for American Progress, Indiana would gain 43,353 jobs from its share in a $100 billion Green Recovery program. [Center for American Progress, "Green Recovery," September 2008]

Investment In Clean Energy Technology Creates FOUR TIMES As Many Jobs As An Investment In Oil & Gas.  According to the Center for American Progress: "Spending $100 billion within the domestic oil industry would create only about 542,000 jobs in the United States. A green infrastructure investment program would create nearly four times more jobs than spending the same amount of money on oil energy resources. And again, spending on oil offers no benefits in transitioning the U.S. economy toward a low-carbon future, while perpetuating the economic and national security vulnerabilities by continuing to rely on oil for the lifeblood of our economy." [Center for American Progress, "Green Recovery," September 2008]

Investment In Renewable Energy Has Already Salvaged Many Manufacturing Facilities Closed During Economic Downturn.  Across America, factories and plants abandoned by the old economy have been re-tooled and re-opened to satisfy the growing demand for new energy technologies. For instance, once hopeless manufacturing plants in Pennsylvania, Iowa, and Michigan have re-energized their communities by creating jobs and leading the charge toward a new energy future. [Bloomberg, 4/2/09; Star Tribune, 4/22/09; Grand Rapids Press, 3/6/08]

Print