Americans for Prosperity (AFP) led coalitions, each comprised of more than two dozen organizations, in sending two letters to the U.S. Congress related to pending new energy taxes as part of Sen. Sanders’ “infrastructure” proposal lawmakers plan to advance on partisan lines through reconciliation. Contrary to the commitments by President Biden and Senator Bernie Sanders that these bills will not increase taxes for those making less than $400,000 a year, proposed border carbon taxes as well as taxes on methane (natural gas) will dramatically increase costs for American families, disproportionately harming the least fortunate. The path to a healthier environment does not require punishing people with economic pain and higher taxes – it’s the opposite. An approach that views environmental stewardship and a growing, thriving economy in conflict leaves everyone worse off and undermines the innovation needed to actually improve lives and the environment.

The first letter calls on Congress to reject a border carbon tax, stating:

“A carbon border tax would slow economic growth and make addressing the debt even more difficult. It would undermine U.S. global leadership, and it would fail to produce environment benefits commensurate with its costs. Most importantly, it would harm workers and families by hurting jobs and hiking prices at a time when they can least afford it.”

The second letter argues that a methane (natural gas) tax would have a negative, regressive impact on American families and reduce domestic energy production that has resulted in significant environmental progress. The coalition argues:

“[W]e strongly oppose the imposition of a methane (natural gas) tax, which will devastate economic recovery, exacerbate energy poverty, and reduce domestic energy production, with little or no benefit to the environment…. The United States has led the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the last two decades not because of command-and-control regulation, but bottom-up, private sector innovation. These innovations include efficiency, the dramatic growth of less greenhouse-intensive domestic energy production, and the pursuit of profit-driven technological solutions to reduce emissions, including methane, improving business outcomes and environmental quality.”

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s