| |
Straight Talk about Energy Legislation on the Move in DC:
Getting Policy Right is Vital for Environment and Economy
On June 26, the US House of Representatives passed a controversial, complex energy bill by only seven votes. H.R. 2454, strategically named the “American Clean Energy and Security Act,” would lead to major changes in the way energy is made, sold and used in our country – primarily by making electricity from fossil fuels cost more. The bill represents one of the most broad-based pieces of legislation in America’s history. Its close vote in the House illustrates just how uncertain its impact on both the environment and our national and state economies still is.
Also called the Waxman-Markey bill after its co-sponsors Reps. Henry Waxmon (D-CA) and Edward Markey (D-MA), H.R. 2454 would set national limits on so-called “greenhouse gases,” create a “cap-and-trade” system for emissions permits for employers that release the gases, and attempt to alter how individuals and employers use energy with incentives. The “cap” in cap-and-trade refers to a limit on emissions.
The cap in the Waxman-Markey bill would force a 17 percent decrease in emissions (below 2005 levels) by 2020 and 83 percent decrease by 2050 – by requiring employers that release emissions to buy “credits” to cover them. Put very simply, employers would have to pay for emissions. Additionally, the bill would broadly mandate renewable energy and efficiency.
So, what’s the problem? Across our state and nation, the “green” movement has clearly captured the interest, minds and hearts of individuals, families, small businesses and large employers alike. Speeches from superstars, politicians, community and business leaders and well-produced TV campaigns have engaged most of us in the “climate change” debate. We all recognize the importance of a healthy environment and planet and we all want to do our part. So, what are the concerns about this controversial energy legislation?
Concerns about the Waxman-Markey energy (“climate”) bill:
The legislation would increase the cost of energy for individuals, families and employers. (Some estimates indicate that the average family would pay 40 percent more, or $10,000, in increased electric bills over a 13-year period.)
- A one-size-fits-all renewable energy standard included in the legislation is flawed, unfair and severely disadvantages certain states and regions, including North Carolina and the southeast. The reality is that each state has unique renewable capabilities due, in large part, to climate and geography. This means that in some states renewable sources are far more scarce and costly than in others. For example, the costs and benefits of implementing this policy will be vastly different in North Carolina than in Texas where wind and solar opportunities are more abundant.
- The bill offers little support for nuclear energy (which is clean) and carbon-control and low-emission technology to help significantly lower emissions.
- The legislation would potentially cause millions of American jobs to be lost to countries such as China that don’t have similar energy regulations.
- The bill would not make a meaningful impact on the environment with other countries continuing to release emissions without similar regulations.
Click here to learn more about the cap & trade proposal being debated in Washington.
Health Care Debate: Is the cost of a “public option” too high?
Changes Should Preserve Quality, Innovation & Choice
Healthcare reform – it’s the buzz across the nation, North Carolina included. What will it entail? When will it pass? Will it pass at all? As one of President Obama’s key campaign issues, it is widely expected that some type of healthcare reform will come from Congress this year.
There is little to no disagreement from anyone that healthcare reform is needed, particularly ways to manage rising costs and improve efficiency and access, including covering the uninsured. There is significant disagreement, however, over the best way to achieve these goals.
At this point, in the simplest of terms, the debate boils down to whether creating a government-run “public” healthcare system is the best solution to bring about needed changes, or whether reforming the private insurance system we have is the better choice. While the two sides of the debate may disagree on how best to produce meaningful changes, it appears that we all want the same outcomes: a healthcare system that covers the uninsured, allows people the coverage they currently have if they want to keep it, provides more choices that are affordable, reins in costs, promotes wellness and prevention, preserves and improves quality and supports innovation.
When it comes to creating a new government-run public healthcare option alongside the private insurance system we currently have, serious concerns are being expressed that such an option will effectively eliminate our current private insurance system –leaving the insured and uninsured with no other option, squelching innovation and perhaps creating new access problems. Said another way: The government-run public option that is being touted as a choice for consumers that would “compete” with private healthcare plans currently available and force costs down might end up being the only choice individuals and families have in the future if it drives non-government healthcare options out of business.
Then there is also the question of cost: What will the various healthcare reform proposals being floated in Washington, DC cost and how will we pay for them?
President’s healthcare proposal would cost more than $1 Trillion!!
The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office recently estimated that President Obama’s healthcare reform proposal, which centers on a government-run public option, would cost more than one trillion dollars. Others have estimated that the costs may reach more than three trillion dollars. Sticker shock has recently caused the president to re-consider his staunch opposition during his campaign to a new tax on premiums that are now tax-free because the money generated by the tax could help pay for his version of reform. Washington, DC sources and the media also indicate that supporters of the president’s plan in Congress are working furiously in the face of such a high price tag to make changes to the plan that will bring its costs under $1 trillion.
Click here to read more about major healthcare proposals that are topics of discussion in Washington, DC.
Tax Proposal Targets Employers, Threatens Jobs
The new administration in Washington, DC, is pushing a proposal to increase taxes on global employers to the tune of $210 billion over 10 years. The current U.S. tax code was designed by Congress in an attempt to provide a level playing field for American employers as they increasingly compete in a global economy. In order for American employers to be internationally competitive, they must not be handicapped by significantly higher tax burdens than their foreign-owned competitors. That's exactly what this proposal from the new administration would do, however.
The administration’s proposal would severely restrict or limit the current “deferral” rules under which foreign earnings of American companies are not subjected to U.S. tax until they are back in the U.S. In other words, the administration and supporters in Congress would change current laws to tax the earnings of American companies with operations in other countries even though the earnings have not flowed back into our country. It’s not a simple tax change to explain, but the effect it would have is very simple: It would make American employers less competitive against foreign employers and could cost American jobs. The proposal would affect a number of major North Carolina employers.
Increasing taxes on the foreign operations of American employers will put jobs at risk, which is ironic considering the fact that supporters claim that it is aimed at keeping and growing jobs here at home in America. This proposal would make it more difficult for major job providers to compete against foreign-owned companies in foreign markets, where 95 percent of the world’s consumers live!
Click here to learn more about how this proposal will harm employers headquartered here at home.
Card Check: The Fight is Nowhere Near Over!
While the North Carolina Chamber is pleased to report progress on our unrelenting battle to defeat unions’ card check legislation, now is not the time for employers or employees to be lulled into a sense of security. We need to keep the pressure on our elected representatives in Congress to protect jobs and our economy!
Our state Chamber and members of the growing coalition “North Carolinians to Preserve Employee Choice” are encouraged by the recent decisions of key US senators to oppose card check legislation in its current form, but ever-vigilant to prevent equally harmful compromise proposals from gaining traction in Congress. Unions are not giving up their multi-million-dollar campaign to do away with secret-ballot elections for employees deciding whether to join unions and tilt the playing field in their favor. They continue to invest hundreds of millions of dollars in T.V. and grassroots campaigns across the country to push their top legislative priority through Congress and to the president’s desk.
Right now unions and their allies are working in Washington, DC, to develop an alternative to the card check bill that has been introduced that could get past the 60-vote hurdle they face in the US Senate. The so-called compromise proposals that we have heard about are just as harmful to employers, employees and the economy as the original legislation. Click here to review highlights of rumored compromise provisions that might appear in legislation.
If you have not already done so, take time to make sure you contact your representatives in Congress to let them know that you are opposed to these so-called compromises. Our Chamber has developed a "card check" resource page online where you can find information you need, including a toolkit, resources to take action, and information on how to join our ever-growing coalition aimed at preventing card check from becoming law.
Manufacturers Discuss Energy Challenges at Chamber Summit
The North Carolina Chamber recently held its 3rd Annual Manufacturing Summit in Greensboro where we hosted NC manufacturers, industry experts and U.S. Senator Richard Burr to discuss our nation’s energy challenges and energy policies being debated in our nation’s capital city. Senator Burr discussed the importance of manufacturing to North Carolina, and explained how energy policy was the most important issue being discussed in Washington. “It is one of those issues you have to get right,” he said. “We can’t afford mistakes.”
Click here to read more about our state Chamber’s 3rd Annual Manufacturing Summit and view a video interview with U.S. Senator Richard Burr.
| |
