In the worldwide discussion of preventing climate change
and maintaining environmentally safe practices, a carbon pollution tax is one
of the many methods. Because this method has economic implications, none of the
fifty United States have passed legislation regarding a carbon pollution tax
(ThinkProgress). However, British Columbia, a province of Canada, has passed a
carbon pollution tax and it has been “reduced fuel usage by at least 16
percent, and that emissions have fallen 3.5 times faster per capita than the
rest of the country. The tax has also created negligible impacts on the economy” (ThinkProgress). That being said, every
country’s economy is different, and many state legislators fear the economic
implications of a carbon tax on the United States (Congressional Budget
Office).
The Congressional Budget Office of the United States
released an analysis of the possible effects of a carbon pollution tax with
their document “Effects of a Carbon Tax on the Economy and the Environment”
(Congressional Budget Office). In this document, Terry Dinan, a member of the
Microeconomic Studies Division, outlines the “long-term and potentially very
costly global problem” that is carbon pollution (Congressional Budget Office).
Dinan also outlines the possible implications of a tax on the United States.
environment and economy. Bill Patrons from YMCA Arlington-Woodlawn introduced a
bill on Thursday which would create a carbon tax per metric ton of carbon
produced.
Bill Patron Marty Hockey
from YMCA Arlington-Woodlawn in the Local Government committee
According to Senator Martin Hockey, one of the bill
patrons, the purpose of this bill is to “encourage corporations to move towards
alternative sources of energy and move away from fossil fuels.” Senate Bill 67,
according to the bill patron, would institute a “nineteen-dollar carbon fee
imposed on every metric ton of carbon released by corporations.” In committee,
this bill faced some criticism regarding the economic implications of a carbon
tax on the Commonwealth. Like Terry Dinan outlines in the Congressional Budget
Office document, lobbyist Isabelle Hill proposed an amendment that would
“offset the costs that a carbon tax would impose on certain groups of people,”
in this case, low income families (Congressional Budget Office). The bill
passed as amended and moved on to the Old Dominion Senate floor on Friday,
where it passed unanimously.
Bill Patron Marty Hockey
presenting his bill on the Senate floor
When asked what influenced him to create this bill,
Senator Hockey responded that with his success at MGA last year with a bill
about “protecting statewide parks and trails,” he wanted to introduce a “more
controversial bill, and adding a tax is definitely controversial.” Hockey is
not worried about this controversy, because of the thought of success with this
controversial bill, that has not “been passed in a single state.” Hockey
recognizes that “the world is clearly leaning towards cleaner fossil fuels and
the US is currently the highest per capita” producer of fossil fuels. The bill
patron hopes that, with this bill, corporations in the Commonwealth will “move
towards alternative sources of energy.” At her press conference Friday
afternoon, Anna Sexauer commented on Old Dominion Senate Bill 67 that “carbon
pollution is a big problem” and that the bill would be a “step forward in the
right direction to combat that issue.”
While the carbon pollution tax is a controversial
environmental protection method that many countries and states have shied away
from, bill patrons from YMCA Arlington-Woodlawn are not afraid to propose a
controversial bill that will create major change. As seen with British
Columbia, a carbon tax has the potential for great change and minimal economic
impact. With the unanimous vote to pass Senate Bill 67 on Friday afternoon, MGA
youth legislators showed that the youth of Virginia do not want to shy away
from controversial, but universally helpful, topics. MGA youth legislators
continue to push the boundaries and propose bills that they are passionate
about, despite the fear of controversy.
Congressional Budget
Office https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013-2014/reports/Carbon_One-Column.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment