| Before you read another word, you need to know one thing, elected officials are held to a higher standard.
When an elected official speaks for or against public policy, the microphone they use has an unprecedented ripple effect. When they speak falsely or misconstrue the truth, they are harming both the public discourse and public policy. So, elected officials are held to a higher standard.
That's why it is troubling to read Media Maters for America's report that John Culberson spread misinformation on cap-and-trade policies in an article he wrote in The Hill.
Media Matters for America pulls out this specific quote from the article:
Rep. Culberson: "The ACES Act is more restrictive and would cause even greater economic damage. The cost to Texas ratepayers alone could reach $20 billion in added electricity costs, which is an increase of over $600 per year in utility bills, according to a study commissioned by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas." (TheHill.com, 5/20/09)
Well, come to find out, that's just wrong.
The Center for American Progress wrote Texas would save $21.1 billion in residential, commercial, and industrial savings.
According to the Center for American Progress: "A national renewable electricity standard, a key piece of the clean energy legislation currently before Congress, would save households and businesses in every state billions of dollars in electricity and natural gas bills... The numbers come from the Union of Concerned Scientists, who earlier this year analyzed a renewable electricity standard that would aim to have 25 percent of our electricity come from renewable sources by
2025. They found that this standard would save families and businesses $95 billion in electricity and natural gas bills through 2030 and spur new investments and hundreds of thousands of new clean-energy jobs." The study found that Texas in particular would save $693 per household and $21.1 billion in residential, commercial and industrial savings over 20 years.
In addition, Culberson claimed cap-and-trade policy is bad for both the economy and consumers. In the Hill article, he claimed (with out citing any study) the ACES act would stifle domestic energy and manufacturing sectors.
Seems that baseless statement also fails the truth test.
According to the Political Economy Research Institute, "State-by-State Analysis: High-Cost Case Forecasts of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Legislation," Texas would see healthy economic numbers under the proposed cap-and-trade package.
In 2007, the American Council on Capital Formation (ACCF) and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) commissioned a report on "the effects of a cap-and-trade law similar to that proposed by the Obama administration" using a "worst-case scenario...what they term the 'high-cost case' forecast." In his op-ed, Rep. Barton touted NAM's opposition to cap-and-trade because of its high cost. But an analysis of the ACCF/NAM report by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst found that under cap-and-trade, Rep. Barton's home state of Texas "would experience healthy economic growth."
Solutions are hard to come by in our hyper partisan world. Debate is good. Disagreement is good. When we debate and disagree, we get better public policy. The problem isn't when we disagree, its when we agree and an elected official goes public with false statements or mistruths. I don't think Rep. Culberson was malicious in his article, but he was wrong. Hopefully Culberson, with the correct information, will not only correct his statements, but will also will change his ill advised position on environmental and economic policy.
Of course Media Matters for America has more information about the proposal here. News like this is hard to write about as it breaks, if you were following me on twitter, you would have seen this story last night. Hint hint. |
