[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 15929-15930]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           THE AMERICAN CLEAN ENERGY AND SECURITY ACT OF 2009

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. From its very beginning in the House Energy and 
Commerce Committee, H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security 
Act of 2009, has been forced upon Members of Congress with little time 
to consider the significant and potentially damaging consequences of 
this legislation.
  On June 12th of this month, the Committee on Agriculture, on which I 
serve, held a 7-hour hearing to review this bill. We quickly learned 
that there is little solid economic analysis on how this legislation 
will affect our economy. Preliminary evidence makes it clear it will 
increase the cost of energy and, with it, the cost of everything we use 
in our lives on a daily basis.
  We do know that the Congressional Budget Office has said this bill 
will raise government revenue by $846 billion over the next 10 years. 
In everyday terms, that means a huge tax increase. $846 billion, 
however, is just the beginning.
  H.R. 2454 is permanent, and after the 10-year period analyzed by the 
CBO, free carbon allowances are phased out, auctioned carbon allowances 
are phased in, and total allowances are reduced. This means that future 
generations will be forced to pay much more than that indicated in the 
initial 10-year budget estimate.
  Although billed as cap-and-trade, in reality Waxman-Markey is a cap-
and-tax bill. Instead of government directly levying a tax, this 
legislation disguises that tax as a carbon allowance auction that 
subsequently requires electrical generation companies, petroleum, and 
other biofuel refiners, manufacturers, and others to collect the tax 
through increased costs.
  The consequences go far beyond the price and our ability to turn on 
the lights in rural America. Kansans, who must always travel great 
distances to work, to school, and to receive their medical care, will 
pay disproportionately compared to those who have shorter distances to 
travel and can use public transportation.
  Some had hope that agriculture and rural America would actually 
benefit,

[[Page 15930]]

somehow be made whole under this legislation. Under Waxman-Markey, this 
clearly is not the case.
  Despite great potential for agriculture to sequester carbon, 
agriculture is not mentioned once in the section that defines offsets. 
Instead, H.R. 2454 directs the EPA to define the world of carbon 
offsets. This will lead to few benefits for farmers and ranchers and 
will allow the EPA to further intrude upon our farms.
  EPA has consistently made harmful decisions that fail the test of 
common sense. Unless agricultural offsets are expressly defined and 
sole authority is given to the Department of Agriculture, farmers will 
never see benefits from this legislation.
  But even if those offsets are defined and USDA is given that 
authority, it is difficult to see how agriculture will overcome the 
increased cost of inputs caused by this cap-and-tax system. In the best 
case scenario under Waxman-Markey, a farmer could mitigate 10 to 50 
percent of the cost of the legislation. In the worst case scenario, 
farmers and ranchers could find themselves unable to access the carbon 
offset market at all and be forced to bear the full cost of this 
legislation. Either way, any hope for profitability in agriculture is 
bleak.
  I am especially concerned about the livestock sector. Unlike crop 
farmers, ranch operations and feed yards have few opportunities to 
accumulate carbon - offsets.
  Much emphasis has been placed upon our Nation's economic recovery 
since the market collapse of last fall. This bill is almost certain to 
destroy any chance of economic recovery if enacted in its current form.
  Congress should be allowed to obtain sound technical and economic 
analysis and address this legislation's many, many, many flaws. If 
further legislative debate is denied, then we must do what common sense 
demands and defeat this bill. Congress rarely gets things right when we 
have ample time to properly consider policy changes, but it has never 
made good decisions when rushed by arbitrary timetables.
  Congress should abandon the current pace set by the Speaker of the 
House. Otherwise, Members of Congress will have abdicated their 
responsibilities and farmers and ranchers, rural America, and in fact, 
the entire country will suffer the consequences.

                          ____________________