There’s been a lot of talk in the media about something called “Cap and Trade” lately. To put it simply, this plan would have the bureaucrats at the EPA decide what level of greenhouse gas emissions a person or corporation could produce in a given time frame, and tax them for exceeding that limit. Congress is set to vote as early as today on this bill, called Waxman-Markey or H.R. 2454.

There’s three really good reasons why every member of Congress should reject this bill.

One, this bill is not actually about pollutants which poison our environment. In April the EPA listed carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas pollutant. Carbon dioxide is a naturally occuring part of our environment. People and animals emit carbon dioxide when they breathe, and plants require carbon dioxide to grow. Carbon dioxide makes up a very small percentage of our atmosphere, and almost all of it is naturally occuring, not a result of industry. The EPA’s finding came after suppressing key scientific evidence that says, in part, “Given the downward trend in temperatures since 1998 … there is no particular reason to rush into decisions based on a hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data” (see here and here).

Two, this is not really about any science related to global warming (or cooling, or whatever the current label is) at all. Even Greenpeace says that Waxman-Markey is “a bill that chooses politics over science.” They are right; of course, most of the work of the climate-change fringe also chooses politics over science. This is about a massive tax to average Americans that would cost nearly $900 per household per year, and some estimates as high as $1500 per year. The economy would see trillions of dollars of reduced production, millions of jobs lost. Prices for electricity, natural gas and gasoline would rise as much as 90 percent, and we would add more than $33,000 per person to the federal government’s debt.

Listen to Barack Obama on the campaign trail in 2008 about cap and trade.

Three, this would further cripple our nation’s economy and our ability to compete worldwide. The legislation would impose all these new costs on our citizens and industry without requiring any kind of commensurate restrictions in China and India, two massive emerging economies which already have very high pollution levels. Why would we want to put our own economy at a significant disadvantage on the world stage now, when we are already struggling?

The Wall Street Journal sums up the situation well, saying “Americans should know that those Members who vote for this climate bill are voting for what is likely to be the biggest tax in American history.” A responsible congressman should vote “No” on Waxman-Markey, and that is a vote Rob would cast without hesitation.