[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3571-3572]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             CAP AND TRADE

  Mr. JOHANNS. Madam President, I rise today to talk about the 
administration's ill-advised cap-and-trade agenda and to support a 
bipartisan bill that I cosponsored. The Energy Tax Prevention Act would 
stop EPA from going around Congress and using regulations to implement 
the administration's failed cap-and-trade agenda. The bill is necessary 
because the administration is marching ahead with its cap-and-trade 
agenda even though the American people clearly want to focus on job 
creation, not policies that destroy jobs.
  For evidence that the administration is marching ahead, one need only 
look at the President's budget. It clearly states ``continues to 
support greenhouse gas emissions reductions in the United States in the 
range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.'' 
Not surprisingly, these reductions are nearly identical to those 
proposed in the Waxman-Markey House cap-and-trade bill. Americans 
rejected that legislation because it would have increased taxes on 
everyone--anyone who turns on a light switch, buys American-made 
products, fills up their gas tank.
  The Energy Tax Prevention Act would prevent the administration from 
using its regulatory powers to circumvent Congress and implement this 
energy tax that Americans rejected last year. It is about protecting 
jobs--manufacturing jobs, for example--and it puts Congress back in the 
driver's seat in charge of energy policy, taking it back from unelected 
bureaucrats at the too-often overreaching EPA.
  Above all, this bill rejects the notion that placing additional 
energy tax burdens on Americans is good policy. As the price of oil 
climbs and gas prices follow, our bill says: Don't hit Americans with 
another tax. Make no mistake, cap-and-trade policies would drive up the 
cost of everything, transportation fuels and electricity leading the 
way. Nobody disagrees with this understanding. In fact, the central 
policy mechanism of all of these proposals is making the use and 
production of fossil fuels more expensive.
  The Congressional Budget Office has weighed in on this issue, and 
they put it this way:

       . . . a cap-and-trade program would thus lead to price 
     increases for energy and energy-intensive goods and services 
     . . . Such price increases would stem from the restriction on 
     emissions . . . Indeed, the price increases would be 
     essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program.

  In other words, these efforts are designed to make oil, gas, and 
coal-fired electricity more expensive, and the same is true for the 
EPA's regulatory plan. Gas prices will go up, electricity will go up, 
farm input costs will go up, consumers will pay more, and U.S. 
manufacturing will get crushed under the heavy hand of the EPA. 
Meanwhile, our overseas competitors, unfettered by the cap, will gobble 
up market share and hurt those providing good-paying jobs in this 
country. Our farmers and ranchers will not be spared either. The cost 
of running pivot irrigation will go up. Nebraska has thousands of them. 
Diesel fuel for tractors and combines will go up. The price tag on 
fertilizer that farmers need to grow crops will skyrocket.
  Some of my constituents might be saying: I am not a farmer, I am not 
a

[[Page 3572]]

manufacturer, so I am not affected. Unfortunately, no American can 
escape the reach of this ill-advised regulatory effort. Because 
refineries are first targeted in EPA's regulatory schedule, because 
electrical plants are first targeted, electric bills and the cost of 
fuel will go up. If you think gas prices are high now, brace yourself--
more price hikes are coming. And if you think your electric bill at the 
end of the month is already plenty high, look out for EPA's energy tax.
  Believe it or not, the Obama administration has made it clear that 
these higher prices are exactly, precisely what the doctor ordered. 
During the Presidential campaign, President Obama famously said--he was 
really up-front:

       Under my plan, electricity bills would necessarily 
     skyrocket.

  Citizens probably entered the voting booth with the false hope that 
we in Congress would never let that happen. Sadly, the Obama 
administration has made it clear that they intend to work around 
Congress. Energy Secretary Steven Chu even told the Wall Street Journal 
in September of 2008:

       Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of 
     gasoline to the levels of Europe.

  That is not my vision for America. And with gasoline over $7 per 
gallon in places such as Germany and France, I doubt many Americans 
share that vision. Yet this administration has chosen to use the EPA to 
make gasoline expensive through its ill-advised energy tax plan. The 
EPA is literally targeting our fuel refineries when gas prices are 
headed to $4 per gallon and oil is over $100 a barrel. It doesn't make 
sense.
  But just when we thought we saw a ray of hope, when the President 
said he wanted to slow down the regulatory freight train bearing down 
on the Nation's job creators, well, something happened. He said he 
wanted to reduce the regulatory burdens on small businesses. He even 
went so far as to put out an Executive order in January, and he 
instructed the agencies to review ``rules that have gotten out of 
balance, placing unreasonable burdens on business, burdens that have 
stifled innovation and have a chilling effect on growth and jobs.''
  Well, unfortunately, the EPA apparently believes their greenhouse gas 
regulations are more important than job creation. The headline from the 
Hill newspaper says it all: ``EPA Confident Obama Reg Policy Won't 
Affect New Climate Rules.'' So the EPA, all powerful, quickly dismissed 
the Executive order saying: ``EPA is confident that our recent and 
upcoming steps to address GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act 
comfortably pass muster under the sensible standards the President laid 
out.''
  In other words, the EPA believes, and continues to think, their 
regulatory cap-and-trade plan is not an unreasonable burden on 
consumers, small business, and job creators. One would have to suspend 
all rational thought to reach that conclusion. It is unbelievable. Here 
is the kicker: These EPA regulations will have no discernible impact on 
global temperatures.
  Put simply, the EPA's agenda is all about more pain and no gain 
because the rules and regulations in the United States don't control 
places such as China, India, and Brazil, obviously. You see, global 
warming is called global warming for a reason. Yet it is our farmers, 
our ranchers, and our small businesses that will be saddled with the 
job-killing costs. American job creators will have one arm tied behind 
their back trying to compete. Even EPA Administrator Jackson admitted 
the House cap-and-trade bill would have negligible impact on global 
temperatures.
  This is all unbelievably bad for America. It is no wonder the Senate 
roundly repudiated the idea last year. Yet the EPA charges forward. We 
must restore some measure of common sense. This bill is the right step, 
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Wyoming.

                          ____________________