Overview
Title
Expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy.
ELI5 AI
In this bill, Congress is saying that they believe having a special fee, called a carbon tax, would hurt the U.S. economy. They think it would make things like electricity more expensive, which might make it harder for families, especially ones with less money, and could make some businesses move to other places.
Summary AI
H. CON. RES. 86 is a resolution introduced in the House of Representatives expressing Congress's belief that a carbon tax would negatively impact the U.S. economy. It argues that a carbon tax would lead to increased energy prices, burden families, especially those with lower incomes, reduce economic growth, and prompt companies to relocate abroad. The resolution emphasizes that American ingenuity in energy development should be encouraged and that a carbon tax would reduce the United States' global competitiveness. It concludes that policies should focus on growth and innovation without adding more taxes on manufacturers.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary
The concurrent resolution, numbered H. CON. RES. 86, articulates a perspective from the U.S. Congress that the introduction of a carbon tax would have unfavorable consequences for the American economy. Submitted by Representatives Mr. Zinke and others, it has been referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. The resolution emphasizes that such a tax on carbon emissions, primarily from fossil fuel usage, could elevate energy costs, burden families financially, lower economic growth, and tarnish the global competitiveness of U.S. industries.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several significant issues arise from the resolution's content and its expressed concerns:
Lack of Specific Evidence: The resolution claims detrimental impacts from a carbon tax without providing detailed evidence or analysis. Terms like "detrimental" are subjective and could be interpreted in multiple ways without concrete data to back them up.
Exclusion of Potential Benefits: Notably absent in the resolution is any mention of potential benefits a carbon tax might afford, such as environmental improvements or longer-term economic savings. This absence may present an imbalanced view of the issue.
Equity Concerns: The document highlights that disadvantaged groups, including the poor and elderly, could bear the brunt of a carbon tax's impact. However, it does not delve into possible mitigation measures or rationale for this inequity beyond its initial assertion.
Competitiveness and Job Market Implications: Concerns about job losses and offshoring of businesses are significant, given the potential socio-economic ramifications. However, the resolution does not elaborate on these claims with a detailed analysis.
Broad Public Impact
The resolution, if taken as policy, indicates a reluctance to impose additional taxes on carbon, which might resonate with individuals and businesses wary of increased living and operating costs. By averting such a tax, immediate financial burdens on households accustomed to affordable energy might be mitigated. However, overlooking environmental stewardship through financial incentives could have long-term consequences, potentially leading to higher adaptation costs in the future due to climate change effects.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
American Families: By opposing a carbon tax, the resolution suggests an immediate relief from additional financial burdens related to energy and daily necessities. However, this short-term view might not consider potential savings from reduced environmental harm that a carbon tax aims to address.
Businesses and Industries: For American businesses, especially in energy-intensive sectors, the resolution could be a shield against increased operational costs and international competitive pressures. However, complacency in carbon management could hinder their adaptability in a rapidly-evolving global market that increasingly values sustainability.
Disadvantaged Populations: While the resolution notes that a carbon tax could disproportionately affect lower-income groups, without addressing potential mitigating strategies, this demographic might continue to face long-term vulnerabilities linked to environmental degradation.
In essence, the concurrence of Congress as reflected in this resolution highlights an ongoing debate over economic priorities versus environmental responsibility, with significant implications for policymakers, industry leaders, and citizens alike.
Issues
The concurrent resolution expresses the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy, but it lacks specificity about the concrete negative impacts, making its implications unclear and potentially politically controversial. (Section 1)
The resolution uses subjective language, such as 'detrimental' and 'not in the best interest of the United States,' without providing supporting evidence or details to substantiate these claims, leading to ambiguity in understanding the full impact of a carbon tax. (Section 1)
The resolution identifies numerous negative consequences of a carbon tax, such as increased costs for energy and goods, impacts on American families, and reduced competitiveness, but fails to mention any potential environmental or economic benefits, which could lead to an imbalanced view and controversy among stakeholders. (Section 1)
There is a claim that a carbon tax will fall hardest on the poor, elderly, and those on fixed incomes, as well as disproportionately affect certain industries and regions. This could raise ethical concerns about equity and fairness in policy-making, requiring further examination and justification. (Section 1)
The resolution asserts that a carbon tax would lead to job losses and offshoring of businesses, which are politically sensitive claims that could fuel public debate without robust, detailed analysis or counterarguments within the text. (Section 1)
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress expresses its opinion that implementing a carbon tax would harm American families and businesses and is not beneficial for the United States.