<span id="y9z8c"><optgroup id="y9z8c"></optgroup></span>
    1. <label id="y9z8c"><meter id="y9z8c"></meter></label>
    2. The Annual Shale Gas Technology & Equipment Event
      logo

      The 16thBeijing International Shale Gas Technology and Equipment Exhibition

      ufi

      BEIJING,CHINA

      March 25-27,2026

      LOCATION :Home> News > Industry News

      Bucking Big Oil, U.S. House condemns carbon tax

      Pubdate:2016-06-13 10:07 Source:mcc Click:
      WASHINGTON, D.C. (Bloomberg) -- Congressional Republicans approved a non-binding resolution to condemn the idea of a carbon tax, putting lawmakers on record opposing an approach to combating climate change favored by Exxon Mobil Corp. and other large oil companies. 
       
      The House strategy, pushed by Majority Whip Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, and backed by Koch Industries Inc., used the symbolic measure to lock in votes against a tax on carbon dioxide emissions blamed for climate change. The tactic was designed to weaken the ability of a future president and Congress to levy one to help pay for a broad overhaul of the U.S. tax code, said Republican strategist Mike McKenna.
       
      “The more you vote on something, the harder it is to vote the other way," McKenna said.
       
      The House last touched the issue in 2013, when it voted 237-176 to adopt a Scalise-sponsored amendment requiring the administration to receive approval from Congress before implementing a carbon tax. By contrast, the measure the House passed 237-163 Friday is a stand-alone resolution asserting that "a carbon tax would be detrimental to American families and businesses, and is not in the best interest of the United States."
       
      Regulatory Replacement
       
      Some big oil companies disagree with the Republican effort. That includes Exxon Mobil, which hasn’t taken a formal position on the Scalise resolution but has lobbied on Capitol Hill for a revenue-neutral carbon tax to take the place of an array of environmental regulations that raise the cost of fossil fuels. 
       
      A revenue-neutral carbon tax would "ensure a uniform and predictable cost of carbon, allow market forces to drive solutions, maximize transparency to stakeholders, reduce administrative complexity, promote global participation and easily adjust to future developments in climate science and policy," said Exxon Mobil spokesman Alan Jeffers. "In order to set a uniform cost of carbon across the economy, a carbon tax has to replace all the other patchwork of regulations that are designed to put a price on carbon.”
       
      Several other large integrated oil companies also favor a tax on carbon, which could have the effect of shifting some environmental costs to the consumers of fossil fuels. For instance, BP Plc says a well-constructed carbon tax or cap-and-trade system would encourage energy producers and consumers to reduce emissions. Royal Dutch Shell Chairman Charles Holliday calls a carbon tax the most effective and practical way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
       
      Dividing Industry
       
      But the issue divides the oil industry, pitting those integrated companies against many independent producers that are vigorously fighting a carbon tax. 
       
      Harold Hamm, the chairman and CEO of Continental Resources Inc., calls it a bad idea. "That’s been something that’s failed in the past, I think it will fail in the future here in this country," Hamm said in an interview with Bloomberg News on Thursday. "Government shouldn’t be picking winners and losers. They ought to let industry and the market work."
       
      Refiners joined in Friday, with the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers trade group coming out in favor of Scalise’s resolution. “A carbon tax, or consumer energy tax, is bad for American consumers and business," AFPM President Chet Thompson said in a statement. "And this resolution makes that clear."
       
      Gaining Traction
       
      The industry split may be one reason the American Petroleum Institute declined to weigh in on Scalise’s carbon resolution. "We are not taking a position on a carbon tax," spokewoman Sabrina Fang said by email. The group wasn’t wary of opining on another measure that hit the House floor Friday: a resolution opposing President Barack Obama’s proposed $10/bbl fee on oil. That idea "is bad energy policy," anti-consumer "and will hit everyone in the wallet," Fang said.
       
      Scalise’s carbon tax resolution comes as the idea is gaining traction in some circles. Long favored by some economists as the most straightforward way to put a cost on carbon dioxide, it has gained some high-profile Republican evangelists. For instance, former South Carolina congressman Bob Inglis is now pushing the idea as a free-market solution to climate change.
       
      Koch Lobbyist
       
      In a letter to House members Thursday, Koch lobbyist Phillip Ellender endorsed the Scalise resolution. "Raising taxes on the energy that American families and businesses rely on every day will not help any hardworking citizens improve their lives," said Ellender, president of government affairs at Koch Companies Public Sector LLC.
       
      Because a carbon tax could generate big money for the treasury, it’s a tantalizing idea for lawmakers eager to balance the budget or offset cutting taxes elsewhere.
       
      The Senate, which voted last year to adopt an amendment barring the U.S. government from putting a tax or fee on carbon dioxide emissions, is not expected to take up Scalise’s resolution.
       
      But Thomas Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, said the vote was still critical to put House members on the record on a carbon tax months before the election, even though "there’s no immediate threat."
       
      "It’s an orphan issue, but it’s always out there lingering because there is far too much revenue involved," Pyle said. 
       
      "It’s an issue that gets bandied about quite a bit, but it’s not quite as simple as some people would have others believe," said Daniel Kish, senior vice president of policy at the Institute for Energy Research, a free-market oriented non-profit. "This would ultimately be passing costs off to the consumer and taxpayer."
       
      主站蜘蛛池模板: 日韩亚洲翔田千里在线| 亚洲国产成人99精品激情在线| 亚洲人成网站18禁止| 久久久久免费精品国产小说| 爱情岛论坛网亚洲品质自拍| 亚洲人成网亚洲欧洲无码| 九九精品免费视频| 亚洲黄网站wwwwww| 99久久人妻精品免费二区| 亚洲精品无码专区在线在线播放 | 亚洲一区二区女搞男| 另类图片亚洲校园小说区| 在线a人片天堂免费观看高清| 亚洲jjzzjjzz在线播放| 亚洲国产另类久久久精品| 男人和女人高潮免费网站| 免费成人在线观看| 国产精品亚洲综合天堂夜夜| 免费在线观看亚洲| 免费国产在线精品一区| 亚洲精品成人a在线观看| 精品多毛少妇人妻AV免费久久| 久久久久国产精品免费免费不卡| 国产亚洲美女精品久久久久狼 | 一区二区亚洲精品精华液| 97无码免费人妻超级碰碰碰碰| 亚洲色成人四虎在线观看| 国产高清免费在线| 一级全免费视频播放| 夜夜春亚洲嫩草影院| 日本免费大黄在线观看| 亚洲春色在线观看| 免费观看大片毛片| 一级做a爰黑人又硬又粗免费看51社区国产精品视 | 成人激情免费视频| 婷婷亚洲综合一区二区| 亚洲乱码日产一区三区| 2021精品国产品免费观看| 亚洲国产成人久久精品大牛影视| 一区二区三区亚洲视频| 国产免费无码AV片在线观看不卡 |