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.