4 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumblePublished Wednesday, April 1, 2009 | 6:25 p.m.
Updated Wednesday, April 1, 2009 | 6:25 p.m.
WASHINGTON -- It’s not quite a cease-and-desist order, but an author of a widely cited MIT study on the costs of cap-and-trade legislation told Republican leaders today they are misrepresenting the results of his findings.
Republicans in both the House and Senate have been repeatedly quoting the study as the source behind their claim that climate change legislation would cost households $3,000 annually in higher energy costs.
Republican Sen. John Ensign used the $3,000 figure this morning on the Senate floor.
But John Reilly, associate director for research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Joint Program on Global Change, said that’s not correct.
Average household costs would be $340, Reilly said. He goes on to suggest Congress consider ways to offset the costs, especially for lower and moderate income families.
In a letter to House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio on Wednesday, Reilly wrote:
“It has come to my attention that an analysis we conducted examining proposals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Report No. 146, Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals, has been misrepresented in recent press releases distributed by the National Republican Congressional Committee.
“The press release claims our report estimates an average cost per family of a carbon cap and trade program that would meet targets now being discussed in Congress to be over $3,000, but that is nearly 10 times the correct estimate which is approximately $340.
“Since the issue of legislation to control greenhouse gases is now under consideration, I wanted to take an opportunity to clear up any misunderstanding created by this press release and to avoid further confusion.”
The letter goes on to explain the math involved.
PolitiFact at the St. Petersburg Times checked out the truthiness of the $3,000 claim last week.
After interviewing Reilly, it gave Republicans its worst possible rating on the PolitiFact truth-o-meter: Pants on Fire.
His study says that cap-and-trade would raise $365 billion for the government.
Who would pay for that? Chipmunks??????
I guess he is saying that the consumer will not pick up the tab for that.
Somebody is living in la-la land.
All cost, especially in government sanctioned utilities monoplies, get sent to the customers.
Um, did you read the article?
He said that Republican leaders misrepesented the costs - $340 per household on average, according to study's author vs. $3,100 per household as claimed by the Republicans.
Really, it's not like it was written in code. "Average household costs would be $340, Reilly said."
http://cellfume.com
Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney must beat Barack Obama and Joe Biden in 2012 because they are of the superior conservative right wing philosophy in that they are pro God and Christianity, pro life, pro marriage; pro guns-second amendment, pro low taxes, pro low government spending; pro small government, pro unintrusive government, pro traditional and judeo Christian values; pro Bible reading and prayer in our public schools, pro Christians schools and private education , pro private and free enterprise; pro military spending, anti arms agreements with Russia, pro creation; pro nuclear, pro conservative supreme court judges, pro American sovereignty; pro capitalism, anti communist, anti socialist; anti immigration, and pro constitution.Barack Obama and Joe Biden are of the inferior liberal and left wing ideology in that they are against every thing that Sarah Palin and Mitt Ronmney are for and they are for every thing that Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney are against
Palin-Romney 2012 or Romney-Palin 2012