Author: CCAN Supporter

Cap and Dividend Policy Update #23

From the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Mike Tidwell, director

Compiled and edited by Ted Glick, CCAN Policy Director

January 25, 2011

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network produces and distributes this periodic policy update on efforts to advance “cap and dividend” legislation in the U.S. Congress. The fight for this climate policy is currently being led on Capitol Hill by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME). In December, 2009 these Senators introduced the Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal Act, or CLEAR Act. Learn more at http://www.supportclearact.org.

In This Issue:

#1.  Scientific American editors support CLEAR Act

#2.  Senator Cantwell questions Douglas Holtz-Eakin

#3.  A Fair Way to Prevent Climate Change and End Poverty

#4.  Cap-and-Trade’s Last Hurrah

#5.  The Common Good

#1.  Scientific American editors support CLEAR Act:  “Opponents of proposals to cap carbon emissions argue that such measures would be a drag on the economy. But action on climate change is simple prudence. Doing nothing carries risks that outweigh the cost of phasing out emissions. Politicians should accept that calculation because the science that supports it is strong. They should also consider adopting sensible, market-friendly climate and energy measures. Options include the bipartisan ‘cap and dividend’ bill proposed by Senator Susan M. Collins of Maine and Senator Maria Cant­well of Washington State—a revenue-neutral approach that would auction carbon permits and return the proceeds to taxpayers—and a low-carbon-electricity standard, which would give states more options for generating clean power.” For the full article go to:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-political-wish-list

#2.  Senator Cantwell questions Douglas Holtz-Eakin:  On July 14^th of last year Senator Maria Cantwell questioned Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was John McCain’s chief economic policy advisor during his 2008 Presidential campaign. Holtz-Eakin is also a former Director of the Congressional Budget Office. The questioning took place during a hearing of the Senate Finance Committee. To see the four minute video click here:

http://mariacantwell.on-the-rag.com/2011/01/15/watch-expert-says-climate-bill-like-cantwells-clear-act-better-than-epa-regulation/

#3.  A Fair Way to Prevent Climate Change and End Poverty, by Rene Heeskens:   “Prevention of climate change can be used to finance poverty eradication. How? By giving all people worldwide a dividend paid from the revenue of auctioning CO2 permits. Such an ‘earth dividend’ could provide all people with a minimum monthly payment sufficient for basic needs. Poverty eradication and environmental protection could then go hand in hand. Such a system is generally referred to as ‘cap and dividend’.” For the full article by the Managing Director of the Global Basic Income Foundation, go to:

http://www.thinkafricapress.com/article/fair-way-prevent-climate-change-and-end-poverty

#4.  Cap-and-Trade’s Last Hurrah: “Other Republicans may think it better to wait before re-establishing the party’s green credentials. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, for example, is happy to talk about climate as a problem, and talks about the desirability of some sort of carbon restriction—perhaps a tax, or some version of Maria Cantwell’s “cap-and-dividend” scheme. But she expresses no great urgency about the subject.” For the full article go to:

http://energydeals.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/cap-and-trades-last-hurrah/

#5.  The Common Good, by Wendy Gordon: “If we’re able to move from corporate ownership of the sky to common ownership, then rather than ‘subsidizing’ industry to dump carbon freely into the atmosphere, we’d be able to collect ‘rent’ from polluters and share it amongst all of us. Such a proposal came before Congress in 2010, but was shelved along with all other energy/climate proposals.” For the full article go to:

http://www.onearth.org/blog/the-common-good

 
CCAN encourages readers of the Cap and Dividend Policy Update to distribute it to others who might be interested. We welcome input on the contents of this publication and ideas for what could be included. Send to Ted Glick at ted@chesapeakeclimate.org. To find out more about CCAN go to http://www.chesapeakeclimate.org.

From the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Mike Tidwell, director

Compiled and edited by Ted Glick, CCAN Policy Director

February 16, 2011

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network produces and distributes this periodic policy update on efforts to advance “cap and dividend” legislation in the U.S. Congress. The fight for this climate policy is currently being led on Capitol Hill by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME). In December, 2009 these Senators introduced the Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal Act, or CLEAR Act. Learn more at http://www.supportclearact.org.

In This Issue:

#1  New Hope for Bridging America’s Economic Divide, by Dedrick Muhammad and Chuck Collins

#2  WORLD OIL OUTLOOK 2010: Energy and climate change policy impacts in Europe and US

#3  Can Cantwell and Collins CLEAR up US energy policy?

#4  Time to Change What We Tax, by Bob Inglis

#5  How Do the Costs of Climate Policy Affect Households?, an RFF study

#6  Fair Sharing of Our Common Heritage, by James Boyce
 

#1  New Hope for Bridging America’s Economic Divide, by Dedrick Muhammad and Chuck Collins

“Paying the Owners (All of Us) for Using Natural Resources. Historically, polluters have dumped their waste into the natural commons without cost. If we charge for the use of our shared natural resources, we create both incentives to reduce pollution and a revenue stream for programs like those described above. This is at the heart of the commons-based cap-and-dividend proposal to curb climate change.”
For the full article go to: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/01/27-7

#2  WORLD OIL OUTLOOK 2010: Energy and climate change policy impacts in Europe and US – UPDATE 10

“Another approach put forward is the so-called ‘cap and dividend.’ Under this approach, carbon revenues generated would in the main be passed back to consumers/taxpayers in the form of a ‘dividend.’ Thus the scheme would, in principle, change how taxpayers were taxed – higher costs on energy in return for lower effective taxes elsewhere. As an example, the CLEAR Act would pass back 75% of the carbon allowance auction revenues to all US individuals except the wealthiest 20%, who are also likely to be the largest energy consumers. The remaining 25% would be leveraged for an energy and climate fund dedicated to supporting key climate change programs.”
For the full article go to: http://www.ordons.com/reports-a-analisis/energy-analisis/9823-world-oil-outlook-2010-energy-and-climate-change-policy-impacts-in-europe-and-us-update-10.html

#3  Can Cantwell and Collins CLEAR up US energy policy?, by Joel Connelly, Seattle PI

“A bipartisan team of Sens. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, are hoping a more modest, potentially popular plan will sell in the new Congress. With gas prices going up, and U.S. oil supplies dependent on unstable countries, Cantwell believes the country needs to act – now. ‘CLEAR is a 39-page outline for a peaceful transition off fossil fuels and onto other energy sources: I believe the American people know the transition is going to happen, has to happen,’ Cantwell told seattlepi.com.”
For the full article go to: http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2011/02/05/can-cantwell-and-collins-clear-up-u-s-energy-policy/

#4  Time to Change What We Tax, by Bob Inglis, in the Houston Chronicle

“There’s a conservative way to win the triple play. It’s a solution that hasn’t gotten much attention inside the Washington Beltway:

• Reduce taxes on income/payroll, or pay an energy dividend so families would have money to pay for energy innovation;
• Shift the same amount of tax to a tax on pollution and follow the principle of un-taxing that which we want more of and taxing that which we want less of; and
• Apply the tax to imported goods as well as domestically produced goods to keep things fair for American manufacturers.”

For the full article go to: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/7426036.html.

 

#5  How Do the Costs of Climate Policy Affect Households? The Distribution of Impacts by Age, Income and Region By Joshua Blonz, Dallas Burtraw and Margaret Walls

“A new study just released by Resources for the Future finds that, among other things, a) giving allowances away for free to industry, based on output, emissions, or some other measure, is generally inefficient and regressive, as the value flows to shareholders who are predominantly in higher-income households; b) auctioning allowances and giving a lump-sum, per-capita dividend as a rebate to households—the so-called “cap-and-dividend” approach found in Cantwell-Collins—is progressive, benefiting low-income households relatively more than higher-income households; and c) middle-income households have the highest burden as a percentage of income under Waxman-Markey, and do fine under Cantwell-Collins.”
To see the full study go to: http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-DP-10-55.pdf

#6  Fair Sharing of Our Common Heritage, by James Boyce

“As an example of how this dimension of the common heritage principle could be translated into effective policy, consider the ‘cap-and-dividend’ climate bill that was introduced a year ago in the U.S. Senate by Maria Cantwell (D-Wa) and Susan Collins (R-Me), a bill they plan to reintroduce in the new Congress with additional sponsors….  If enacted into law, this cap-and-dividend policy not only will curb carbon emissions, it also will translate into very concrete practice – and into people’s pocketbooks – the principle that our country’s share of limited capacity of the Earth’s atmosphere to absorb carbon emissions belongs to all Americans in common and equal measure.”
For the full article, go to: http://realclimateeconomics.org/wp/archives/749#more-749

 

CCAN encourages readers of the Cap and Dividend Policy Update to distribute it to others who might be interested. We welcome input on the contents of this publication and ideas for what could be included. Send to Ted Glick at ted@chesapeakeclimate.org.

Cap and Dividend Policy Update #22

From the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Mike Tidwell, director

Compiled and edited by Ted Glick, CCAN Policy Director

December 20, 2010

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network produces and distributes this periodic policy update on efforts to advance “cap and dividend” legislation in the U.S. Congress. The fight for this climate policy is currently being led on Capitol Hill by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME). Last December these Senators introduced the Carbon Limits and Energy for America’s Renewal Act, or CLEAR Act, S-2877. Learn more at http://www.supportclearact.org.

In This Issue:

#1   Carbon is Forever: new video spoofs James Bond to make a serious point about the best way to curb climate change

#2   Council on the Environment and Jewish Life supports CLEAR Act

#3   Next 10 study shows economy benefits most from cap and dividend system, by David A. Baker, San Francisco Chronicle

#4   More on Next 10 study:  The grand experiment, by Cosmo Garvin, Sacramento News and Review

#5   Laboratories for energy and the environment, by Christine Herzog

#6   Stop free pollution: going beyond cap and trade, by James K. Boyce

#7   Bill McKibben interview:  “Meaningful action will come the day [the federal government] passes a price on carbon.”

#8   Cap and Dividend and property rights

 

#1   Carbon is Forever: new video spoofs James Bond to make a serious point about the best way to curb climate change

 

“Following the collapse of cap-and-trade legislation in the U.S. Senate, interest is shifting to a bipartisan cap-and-dividend bill co-sponsored by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME). Meanwhile, in Britain, a similar plan called cap-and-share is gaining momentum. It’s identical to cap and dividend except that, instead of cash dividends, people would receive “shares” that they could sell to fossil fuel companies for cash. Last week, the British campaigners released a brilliant James Bond-themed video explaining their plan:”

http://www.onthecommons.org/carbon-forever

#2   Council on the Environment and Jewish Life supports CLEAR Act

“By Advocating for Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Green Jobs, Increased Energy Independence, and Environmental Protection. COEJL supported the CLEAR Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy efficiency, and build a green economy;”

For the full document go to: 

http://www.coejl.org/COEJL_Report_Building_Jewish_Energy_December_2010.pdf

#3   Next 10 study shows economy benefits most from cap and dividend system, by David A. Baker, San Francisco Chronicle

“The economy would fare best, however, if all the allowances were auctioned and the money were returned to Californians either as income tax relief or an annual dividend check. Giving away the allowances at first would benefit energy-intensive companies, but wouldn’t give as big a boost to the economy as a whole. ‘If you recycle the revenues to households, households would tend to spend a lot of that money on goods and services,’ said Richard Morgenstern, a senior fellow with the Resources for the Future think tank, who co-wrote one of the reports. ‘Channeling the money to the energy-intensive industries may help them, but it doesn’t give you as much bang for the buck as channeling it to people who are going to spend it.’”

For the full article go to:

http://fuelfix.com/blog/2010/12/09/poll-most-californians-support-plan-for-a-carbon-trading-market/ 

#4   More on Next 10 study:  The grand experiment, by Cosmo Garvin, Sacramento News and Review

“The Next 10 study found that if the state were to auction off the allowances and return the revenue to taxpayers (through tax breaks or dividend checks), California would net 109,000 jobs. Not that many to be sure. But by giving the allowances away, California will actually lose a net of 120,000 jobs. That’s because under either scenario, there will be some cost to businesses to comply, and some job loss. But a ‘cap-and-dividend’ program would create a powerful economic stimulus. Citizens would receive the economic benefit of the cap-and-trade system. ‘And they are going to turn around and spend it in the California economy, and churn up economic activity,’ Burtraw explained.

For the full article go to:  http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=1890538

#5   Laboratories for energy and the environment, by Christine Herzog

“Now that Proposition 23 has been shellacked, the California Air Resources Board is also moving forward to implement a cap-and-trade program in 2012 based on Assembly Bill 32 (AB32).  If the proceeds from this cap and trade program would be disbursed to all California citizens – an idea known as cap and dividend, that would make the program hugely popular, and a laboratory experiment that would get the attention of many other states.”

For the full article go to:

http://theenergycollective.com/christine-hertzog/48510/laboratories-energy-and-environment

#6   Stop free pollution: going beyond cap and trade, by James K. Boyce

“Cap-and-dividend is founded on the principle that the air and water belong to all of us.  The policy has several attractions. It provides incentives to cut pollution and drives investment in clean technologies. It protects working families from the impact of price increases resulting from permits on their purchasing power. Most important, by delinking environmental policy from the contentious issue of taxes it just might be a politically viable way to stop the travesty of free pollution.”

For the full article go to: http://triplecrisis.com/stop-free-pollution-going-beyond-cap-and-trade/

#7   Bill McKibben interview:  “Meaningful action will come the day [the federal government] passes a price on carbon.”

To view the short video interview go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz7cAtLuX_g&feature=youtube_gdata

#8   Cap and Dividend and property rights

“[Cap-and-dividend] would be more just and politically less controversial than when government is cashing in (effectively imposing a kind of tax). It would reflect the actual property rights better. And it is unlikely to lose any of the benefits from the other two alternatives (cap-and-giveaway-and-trade and cap-and-auction-and-trade) it builds on. The only problem I see is in convincing some people (especially conservative thinking ones) that
this is not socialism, but the only reasonable opportunity.”

For the full article go to:  http://zielonygrzyb.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/cap-and-dividend/

CCAN encourages readers of the Cap and Dividend Policy Update to distribute it to others who might be interested. We welcome input on the contents of this publication and ideas for what could be included. Send to Ted Glick at ted@chesapeakeclimate.org. To find out more about CCAN go to http://www.chesapeakeclimate.org.