HR 2454 - Cap and Trade - National Energy Standards for Homes

My last blog talked a bit about the Cap & Trade bill HR 2454 which passed the House by an eight vote margin. I would like to take a look at the bill from a different perspective for this blog.

In the last couple of days I was hearing about provisions of this bill that would require Federal inspections of individual homes for energy efficiencies and prevent homes from being sold if they do not meet a certain standard. I don't like to quote unsubstantiated statements, so I took the time to look up the language in the 1200 page bill. While I couldn't find any specific references to restricting sales of homes, there is more than enough evidence to infer that this could happen.

It is often the way an administration implements a law that determines what will actually happen. I believe this legislation does give the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) all the authority it needs to implement such a plan.

Below are some quotes from the legislation:

HR 2454 establishes a "Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program". This program is, according to the bill, designed

"...to implement the residential and nonresidential policies based on the standards developed under this section shall together be known as the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program." (HR 2454)

This new program will establish national building codes that will supersede State and Local building codes and require

"...standards for a national energy and environmental
building retrofit policy for single-family and multifamily
residences." (HR245, pg 351)

Multi unit housing will also be required to comply with this new program. However, any retrofits done by the owners

"...not shall not be used to justify any increase in rents
charged to residents of such housing...(HR 2454, pg 360)"

As most legislation does, much of the details are left to the agency that will administer the law. "

ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES.—The Secretary shall propose and, not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, shall define by rule violations of the energy efficiency building codes to be enforced by the Secretary pursuant to this section, and the penalties that shall apply to violators, in any jurisdiction in which the national energy efficiency building code has been made applicable under subsection (d)(1). (HR 2454 pg 344)

This is a part of legislation that your Congress passed last week. Apart from the cost in taxes, jobs and the economy, this is just grinding salt in the wounds of the American taxpayer and homeowner.

I welcome your thoughts.

Cap and Trade

With the passage by the U.S. House of Representatives of HR 2454, the Cap and Trade bill, I thought I would jump into the fray.

There is no question that this is a monumental tax increase by the federal government. The Congressional Budget Office, the most often quoted "independent" analysis of Congressional Legislation estimates that this will cost Americans $845 from 2010 to 2019. (http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/102xx/doc10262/hr2454.pdf)

CBO acknowledges that these costs will be passed on to consumers:
"As noted, firms would generally pass the cost of reducing their emissions—or of acquiring offset credits or emission allowances—on to their customers, and their customers’ customers. (Indeed, assuming that higher costs are passed into prices is customary in distributional analyses.) Households and governments would bear those costs through their consumption of goods and services. Because households account for the bulk of spending, they would bear most of the costs." (same source)

These costs do not include the costs that are likely as a result in reduced GDP over that time, and acknowledged by CBO in a footnote to the same report:
"The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap. The reduction in GDP would also include indirect general equilibrium effects, such as changes in the labor supply resulting from reductions in real wages and potential reductions in the productivity of capital and labor."

I have found very little information about what this additional tax will result in from a Climate Change perspective. What I have found is that the change resulting will have an insignificant impact on reversing any global warming that may be occurring. I am struck with the thought that maybe this is just using a current hot button issue to raise more federal revenue.

Welcome your thoughts.

Universal Health Insurance

What is the truth about the uninsured Americans in this debate about Universal Health Care?

According to a study released by the Emploment Policy Institute there are a lot of myths concerning the number of uninsured Americans. Here are some of the statistics they share:

Of the 47 million uninsured Americans "shows that more than 43 percent, or 18 million, of uninsured Americans ages 18-64 could likely afford health coverage and are actually 'voluntarily uninsured.'" So then the 47 million is not really 47 million, but only 27 million. The study calls these 18 million "voluntarily uninsured"

The report further states "...79 percent of people with incomes between 2.5 and 3.75 times the poverty level currently purchase private health insurance". What about the other 21%?

Here is a link to this stduy by Dr's June and Dave O'Neill: http://epionline.org/studies/oneill_06-2009.pdf

If there is information that refutes this, I would love to see it posted here.

What is the Problem with Politics

What has happened to political discourse in the United States. It seems that we have lost all civility in our discussion of the issues. Whatever happened to honest respect for those with different opinions? Don't get me wrong, I am a fervent believer in passionate discourse, and I will assert my position with ardor. But why do we have to turn our arguments into personal attacks?

I hope this blog can explore the issues facing America without the partisan rancor we daily in the media.

Let me know what you think.