If you are looking for what to say, here’s a list of facts about how the energy tax would:
1. Reduce aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) by $9.6 trillion
2. Destroy an average of 1-3 million jobs, every year
3. Raise electricity rates 90 percent after adjusting for inflation
4. Raise inflation-adjusted gasoline prices by 74 percent
5. Raise residential natural gas prices by 55 percent
6. Raise an average family's annual energy bill by $1,500 annually
7. Increase the federal debt by 26 percent, which is $29,150 per person
Source for facts: Heritage Foundation
People choose economic policies to bolster their standard of living and to create opportunity. While people disagree on the most effective economic paths, they agree that higher productivity, more employment, and stronger buying power across all economic strata are the final goals of sensible economic planning.
With that in mind, who in their right mind would choose an economic policy that promises a 2.5 percentreduction in gross domestic product over the next 40 years? Add to that the likelihood of at least a half-percent loss in employment, and a strategy that would increase the costs of a staple up to 45 percent in the near- and mid-term, a cost that will erode buying power most among the lowest income earners. Does that sound like an economic policy that any rational politician would propose, let alone an entire nation adopt?
Unfortunately, it does – and our own Congress has already proposed it. The cap-and-trade system for controlling the output of carbon dioxide has made it out of committee, sponsored by Henry Waxman and Edward Markey. President Barack Obama campaigned on this revamping of the American energy industry and is widely expected to support it in its current form.
Wait a minute, some of our readers will say. You're just quoting talking points from the right-wing corporate fascists sputter sputter Halliburton Cheney! Actually, while other think tanks have done notable work analyzing the impact of cap-and-trade systems on the American economy, the figures above come from the Brookings Institution, a center-left think tank in Washington, D.C.
However, these numbers tend to corroborate the analyses of other think tanks. Cap-and-trade proponents scorned a report from the George C. Marshall Institute when it was released in March, but the Brookings analysis matches closely to Marshall's:
“Estimated GDP losses vary widely, from a 0.3 percent-0.5 percent to 3 percent drop in GDP below the business-as-usual projections in 2015 and a 1 percent to 10 percent drop in 2050. The timeframes of new technology development and growth in existing clean sources of energy, availability of offsets (domestic, international), and banking of allowances are likely to account for most of these differences in GDP costs estimates.”
The Marshall report, based on independent analyses of the Senate version of cap-and-trade sponsored by Joe Lieberman and Mark Warner, gives a range of results that into which the Brookings conclusions fall, both in the near and long terms. The Marshall report went into detail on the potential for job losses as well. Depending on the exact structure of the cap-and-trade system, net job losses by 2015 would be between 850,000 to 1.8 million lost employment opportunities. By 2030, that range goes up to 3-4 million potential jobs lost, as a net. One of the studies predicts a net job loss of over seven million by 2050, which would certainly account for a 2.5 percent drop in GDP.
The Marshall report went further in its economic predictions. It assesses the cost per household of energy price increases, which producers will pass to their customers, at an escalating rate as caps force producers away from abundant sources of energy, such as coal. Those costs – which Marshall calls a “tax” – start at $1100 per household per year, increasing to a range of $1400-$2000 by 2015, and peaking at $2000-$3000 by 2050.
Those in higher income strata will certainly feel the pinch of these unnecessary costs, but none more so than lower-income earners. Thanks to the loss of employment, they will have fewer opportunities and the market will suppress compensation as a natural consequence. At the same time, the rise in heating and lighting their homes will greatly reduce or entirely eliminate their discretionary money, meaning they will not consume any more than necessary.
This will place an even greater burden on the economy – and on government as well. Tax revenues will drop at the same time many of these lower-income earners will require extensive subsidies to pay for subsistence energy purchases. Standards of living in the US will drop, especially among the working class families who will get squeezed by cap-and-trade. Small business likewise will fail as the increasing costs of power force them to raise prices higher than their larger competitors, and they slowly die in the marketplace.
The end result? We will out-distance Europe in turning America into a nanny state, and most Americans into a dependent class. Government would control wide swaths of private industry through their grip on energy production. Only the largest and the richest will survive, but they will be burdened with the costs of the subsidies that the government distributes to everyone else.
What kind of politician deliberately chooses this kind of future for America? The kind that most needs replacing.
CAP AND TRADE…THE DEATH OF FREE ENTERPRISE
Posted by April Watkins on June 30, 2009
Despite the tremendous efforts of many concerned American citizens, talk radio and bloggers, the U.S. House of Representatives passed, by a narrow margin of 7 votes, the largest regulatory and taxation bill in the history of the United States.
This bill has been kept low-key and away from the scrutiny of the American people for months. For that matter, much of the language of the bill has been unknown until days prior to the vote, leaving House Members and their staffs in a flurry to scan the document, if they read it at all. As you can image, this allowed for little to no consideration of the ramifications that each point would bring.
The bill was given the benign, feel good name - American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454). It has also referred to as the Cap and Trade bill, the Waxman-Markey bill, and the Climate Change/Control bill. Sponsored by Rep. Harry Waxman (D-CA) and co-sponsored by Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA), this legislation was presented as the nation’s first truly “progressive” act toward limiting pollution, thus slowing global warming, and providing America with new, cleaner energy sources.
Unfortunately, the bill has very little to do with improving energy or bolstering national security through advancing our energy options. Instead, the 1,201 pages of this bill creates the most sweeping taxation America has ever seen and sets a path of destruction with unprecedented [American*] government regulation with ripple effects throughout the world economy. (*Note that this type of control has precedents, in fact, examples in other countries such as the former USSR.)
These regulations propose a cap on carbon emissions and other polluting energy sources, such as fossil fuels. Entire 
industries will be forced to comply with such caps which economic experts say will cause massive job losses as factories, refineries, etc. re-tool and/or downsize their operations. The alternative is to trade (i.e. purchase not swap) “carbon credits” to offset their pollutive output or face exorbitant fines and taxations. Mid to small sized businesses and, even, the family farmer will be held to similar restrictive regulations.
One might wonder where such “carbon credits” are to be found. Well, lucky for us Tennesseans, Al Gore has invested his time and money into building firms such as Generation Investment Management and other entities which will broker “carbon credits” or issue “carbon vouchers.” The Wall Street Journal reports another interesting proponent of the “Climate Bill” is the world’s largest manufacturer of wind-turbines, Vestas, who also happens to “sponsor CNN’s Climate in Peril segment,” in an effort to “urge governments to invest heavily in wind energy and pass policies that would increase Vestas’ earnings.” The Journal also cites other parties on the “Cap and Trade” bill-bandwagon including 50 of the biggest U.S. electric utilities.
So how might this legislation affect you, the average American?
First, it is an act in direct opposition to our capitalist system of free trade. The power granted to the Feds would allow the government to determine how industries and companies (large and small) can run their operations; which companies or businesses will receive “credits or vouchers” for energy – determined solely upon how the Administration views the necessity and importance of such businesses; and trickle-down regulatory impact on everything from wages to production output to consumption. Oh, and did I mention it will regulate citizens as to which type of car you will be able to buy? Possibly how many motor vehicles (cars, trucks, boats, jet skis, RVs, etc.) you may own? You may have noticed the ads running this week for a government tax-credit allowance toward the purchase of new, cleaner energy cars? This is no joke, folks.
This, my dear readers, is the definition of a Communist/Socialist/Marxist-style government: where the populous is told not to think for themselves, instead to allow the central government to think and act for the benefit of the whole. The interest of the whole is placed over that of the individual. (Doesn’t sound much like our Constitution to me.) If you didn’t believe the talk of Socialism earlier, now you must close your ears to the political hype and sincerely open your eyes to see the real events happening around you.
As with any piece of legislation, there are supporters and opposition. In researching this issue, I discovered that among those opposed to HR 2454 include, The Heritage Foundation, The National Black Chamber of Commerce and the Brookings Institute; all of which project huge job losses and additional debilitating taxes and higher costs for the average American family. Heritage’s in-depth analysis of the impact of this legislation if enacted found: Unemployment would increase by 2 million in 2012 during the first year of the program; Total GDP losses would be $9.4 trillion by 2035; As the economy slowed, national debt would balloon, saddling a family of four with an additional $114,915 of more national debt as their share; Families would suffer as the bill would slap an energy tax equivalent of a $4,609 on an average family of four.
The domestic impact of this “Cap and Trade” or “Climate Change” bill will have devastating effects on American industry, businesses of all types, employers and employees, and the end consumers through higher taxes and prices for goods. 
The international impact of the bill will also have disturbing effects to the economy through a decrease in international trade and strain on international trade relations. Further, it will cause situations of non-compliance with policies from entities such as the World Trade Organization, and handicap their ability to function, thus reducing confidence of foreign governments in America’s true intent. For the third-world economies, its impact would lead to lower economic growth rates and rising poverty – ironically resulting in higher carbon emissions and pollutions from those countries that are too poor and undeveloped to adapt to America’s new standards. Researchers conclude that this factor alone negates any positive potential the legislation aims to achieve.
Once again, we see the Obama Administration and the radical-liberal Democrats jump into forcing solutions without thoroughly assessing the ramifications each aspect of the bill would cause. I, for one, am amazed at the continued naiveté of this Democratic led government which seems to act on impulse to push an agenda rather than on logic to better our country in a time of economic turmoil and world-wide unrest. With continued isolationist actions, such as an enactment of this bill, it is no wonder that other countries refer to America as “arrogant” or “selfish.”
In regard to the renewed effectiveness of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), her timing of a vote on this controversial bill was excellent. With summer vacations, Little League games, camps, and other activities, very few Americans were paying any attention to the shenanigans of Washington, D.C. (Heck, they aren’t even asking questions about the criminal aspect of the Pelosi-CIA scandal anymore…who dropped that ball?) No, this summer our citizens are trusting that things will just work out and nothing much will change. They continue living their American dreams, enjoying their freedoms, and pursing their happiness. But now, one may ask…for how long? And that is…Why It Matters.
http://prilspen.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/cap-and-trade-the-death-of-free-enterprise/
Key talking points in support of Cap and Trade from American Farmland Trust
http://action.farmland.org/site/DocServer/climate-passed-house-talk-p.pdf?docID=2061
How CAP & TRADE will impact each Congressional District