Doug Hoffman Repeats Debunked Cost Estimate OF Clean Energy Jobs Legislation

Doug Hoffman Is Wrong On Clean Energy Jobs Legislation

Doug Hoffman:

"Cap and trade started out just like almost everything does, to have a good purpose. To save our environment. Unfortunately, by the time it was passed it ended up to be more of a hidden tax for all of us and only help the environment a minute amount. And this isn't Doug Hoffman talking, this is the GAO, the Government Accounting Office that has analyzed this and said that every household in America this bill will cost them something like seventeen-hundred and sixty dollars per year... in increased energy costs and compliance costs."

First of all, the $1,761 estimate comes from the Treasury Department, not the GAO.  Second, the number is a misleading estimate of an entirely different cap-and-trade proposal - thus, it's irrelevant to the current debate over clean energy jobs legislation.

PolitiFact.com Rated Claim FALSE: The "Statement That Households Will Pay $1,761 In New Taxes Every Year Is Based On A Blogger's Incorrect Assumptions And Overly Simple Math." According to PolitiFact.com: the "statement that households will pay $1,761 in new taxes every year is based on a blogger's incorrect assumptions and overly simple math. The estimate does not account for revenue that will be returned to consumers in the form of rebates and other efficiency measures. Furthermore, the number is based on old numbers; the Treasury estimate was written on the premise that all permits would be sold, which, ultimately, is not the form that the Waxman-Markey legislation has taken. Finally, both Alexander and McCullagh portray money raised by selling these permits as a tax. We rate Alexander's claim False." [PolitiFact.com, 9/16/09]

Washington Post: "The Plan In The March Treasury Memo Is Not The One Being Debated In Congress." In an article describing the records obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Washington Post wrote, "the plan in the March Treasury memo is not the one being debated in Congress." [Washington Post, 9/17/09]

Treasury Department: "The Reporting On The Treasury Analysis Is Flat Out Wrong." According to the Washington Post, "The Treasury said the furor was much ado about little. The March memo was not based on any independent Treasury analysis and summarized other studies. The transition team memo said that the government could use the revenue to 'offset distortionary taxes on labor or capital.' 'The reporting on the Treasury analysis is flat out wrong,' said Alan B. Krueger, Treasury assistant secretary for economic policy." [Washington Post, 9/17/09]

h/t The Seminal