<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: 亚洲精品成人片在线观看精品字幕| 成人au免费视频影院| 亚洲精品字幕在线观看| jzzjzz免费观看大片免费| 免费亚洲视频在线观看| 人人爽人人爽人人片A免费 | 亚洲va久久久久| 扒开双腿猛进入爽爽免费视频 | 毛色毛片免费观看| 国产成人亚洲精品电影| 亚洲精品第一国产综合精品99| 免费看一级毛片在线观看精品视频| 亚洲人成人网站在线观看| 99精品视频在线观看免费| 亚洲国产一区二区a毛片| 114一级毛片免费| 亚洲av无码片vr一区二区三区 | 亚洲一区二区三区国产精华液| 国内自产少妇自拍区免费| 特级av毛片免费观看| 国产V亚洲V天堂无码久久久| 日韩精品无码一区二区三区免费| 亚洲成aⅴ人片在线影院八| 日本免费中文字幕在线看| 久久嫩草影院免费看夜色| 亚洲男人天堂2017| 永久免费av无码网站大全| g0g0人体全免费高清大胆视频| 亚洲高清在线播放| 精品国产精品久久一区免费式| 国产精品免费久久久久久久久| 亚洲av女电影网| 国产免费131美女视频| baoyu116.永久免费视频| 国产.亚洲.欧洲在线| 久久久久亚洲爆乳少妇无| 亚欧免费视频一区二区三区| 人妻仑刮八A级毛片免费看| 久久久久亚洲精品日久生情| 国产一级淫片视频免费看| 无码av免费网站|