Comment E-mail Print

As Congress considered the Waxman-Markey "cap-and-trade" bill, President Obama rallied House Energy and Commerce Committee Democrats at the White House.  In making a point, he gestured to Abraham Lincoln's portrait and said, "He had a chance to affect history.  You, too, have a chance to affect history." 

How ironic. 

Lincoln is remembered for liberating blacks from slavery.  Cap-and-trade legislation supported by Obama, allied lawmakers and now the NAACP would, conversely, enslave all Americans.  

Billed as a way to combat global warming, cap-and-trade legislation already passed by the House and now under consideration in the Senate is -- at its most basic level -- a tax that punishes those who rely on fossil fuels.  That unfortunately means virtually every American. 

Higher energy costs, higher unemployment and slower economic growth expected from cap-and-trade would reduce living standards, increase dependency and likely chain Americans to government programs.    

Back in 2007, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported that "most of the cost of meeting a cap on [carbon dioxide] emissions would be borne by consumers, who would face persistently higher prices for products such as electricity and gasoline... [and] poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than wealthier households would." 

That makes it particularly troubling when the NAACP, at their recent convention, jumped on the cap-and-trade bandwagon.  Politicians are expected to be opportunistic, but a group founded to advance blacks should not promote energy policies preferentially harming those with the least.  

Harry Alford, head of the National Black Chamber of Commerce (NBCC), opposes cap-and-trade.  Alford testified before the Senate about this, and made national news when he objected to California Senator Barbara Boxer's attempt to place a premium on the NAACP's opinion over the facts presented by the NBCC president. 

A NBCC-commissioned study of cap-and-trade by CRA International finds new regulations would:

 

reduce national GDP roughly $350 billon below the baseline level; 

cut net employment by 2.5 million jobs per year (even with new "green jobs"); 

reduce earnings for the average U.S. worker by $390 per year.

Alford's not alone.  His skepticism is shared by a majority of blacks. 

For example, seventy-six percent of blacks want Congress to make economic recovery -- and not climate change -- its top priority.  This is a finding of a nationwide poll of blacks conducted for the National Center for Public Policy Research by Wilson Research Strategies. 

Among other key findings:

 

38 percent of blacks believe job losses from climate change legislation such as Waxman-Markey would be felt most strongly in the black community.  Seven percent believe job losses would fall most on Hispanics and just two percent on whites; 

56 percent of blacks believe economic and quality of life concerns of the black community are not considered when addressing climate issues; 

52 percent of blacks don't want to pay more for gasoline or electricity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  73 percent are unwilling to pay more than 50 cents more for a gallon of gas, and 76 percent are unwilling to pay more than $50 more per year for electricity.

>> Continued -- Page 1 2