I was surprised to see Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., vote in favor of the Waxman-Markley Climate Change bill (H.R. 2454). As drafted in the House, the bill negatively impacts Midwest residents, transferring billions of dollars to the coasts, and potentially thrusting a knife in the economy of our state.
The bill passed the House on a vote of 219-212, with 44 Democrats in the House voting "no." The vast majority of those no votes came from moderate, rural Democrats who saw the economic havoc this bill could deliver to rural areas. One would think Ron Kind would have been more comfortable in this camp than joining Speaker Pelosi, D-Calif., and Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Ed Markey D-Mass., all of whom took care of the economic concerns of their states.
I appreciate the fact the United States needs a long-term strategy to deal with the carbon emission issue. There are positive ways we can address this, however, without putting a tax on the Midwest.
Under the House version of the bill, the average Wisconsin utility would receive about 70 percent of the credits they need to operate at existing energy rates. To obtain the other 30 percent, Wisconsin ratepayers would see their dollars going to an auction on Wall Street, competing against the highest bidder.
The Heritage Foundation indicates Waxman-Markey will cost the economy $161 billion in 2020, which is $1,870 for a family of four. Wisconsin industries, already on the brink with unfair global competition, would see their Chinese and Mexican competitors continue to spew forth CO2 while we pay an enormous bill to restrict ours. Wisconsin farm families would see their electric rates increase dramatically, and all costs of diesel propane and fertilizers skyrocket.
Rep. Kind has stated he hopes the bill can be improved in the Senate. We all hope that, Congressman. But your vote was on the record for your district and your constituents. And I believe you voted wrong for the people you represent.
The bill passed the House on a vote of 219-212, with 44 Democrats in the House voting "no." The vast majority of those no votes came from moderate, rural Democrats who saw the economic havoc this bill could deliver to rural areas. One would think Ron Kind would have been more comfortable in this camp than joining Speaker Pelosi, D-Calif., and Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Ed Markey D-Mass., all of whom took care of the economic concerns of their states.
I appreciate the fact the United States needs a long-term strategy to deal with the carbon emission issue. There are positive ways we can address this, however, without putting a tax on the Midwest.
Under the House version of the bill, the average Wisconsin utility would receive about 70 percent of the credits they need to operate at existing energy rates. To obtain the other 30 percent, Wisconsin ratepayers would see their dollars going to an auction on Wall Street, competing against the highest bidder.
The Heritage Foundation indicates Waxman-Markey will cost the economy $161 billion in 2020, which is $1,870 for a family of four. Wisconsin industries, already on the brink with unfair global competition, would see their Chinese and Mexican competitors continue to spew forth CO2 while we pay an enormous bill to restrict ours. Wisconsin farm families would see their electric rates increase dramatically, and all costs of diesel propane and fertilizers skyrocket.
Rep. Kind has stated he hopes the bill can be improved in the Senate. We all hope that, Congressman. But your vote was on the record for your district and your constituents. And I believe you voted wrong for the people you represent.
