From The Hill:

The Senate will hold a test vote Tuesday evening on a Democratic plan to repeal several tax breaks for the big five oil companies.

The plan would repeal an estimated $21 billion worth of incentives over a decade from Exxon, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips and Chevron.

The vote on a motion to formally proceed to the bill will require support from 60 senators, and it faces big hurdles amid widespread opposition from Republicans and Democrats from oil producing states.

Because, as is noted, Republicans and several Democrats oppose the legislation, the measure could well fail.

(more…)

In a little remarked upon move earlier this month, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) put forward a legislative proposal to raise taxes on energy companies by stripping them of the ability to claim a key tax deduction.

Known as Section 199 relief, the deduction in question has been available to companies engaged in energy production, as well as manufacturing, for several years as an incentive to encourage operations and employment.

However, under an amendment introduced by Baucus, which could be voted on in the Senate next month, that deduction would be eliminated for certain players in the energy industry.

According to a memo obtained by Capitol Confidential and written by Senate Finance Committee staffers Scott Mulhauser and Erin Shields, the Baucus amendment is intended as a substitute to another introduced by Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.).  The Johanns amendment is itself intended to modify the Small Business Jobs Act.

The memo states that “the Democratic alternative… would repeal Section 199 of the tax code, which currently allows these corporations to deduct six percent of their income from oil and gas production from their tax liability, effective December 31, 2010.”

(more…)

With the midterm elections approaching, it is now clear that cap-and-trade, Democrats’ main weapon in their war on energy companies, is effectively dead—that is, at least until after the election, when some Democrats who may then be exiting Congress will feel more comfortable supporting it.

However, the demise of cap-and-trade does not mean Democrats have put what some dub “plans” to target energy companies on hold completely, or placed them on the back burner.

The Obama administration has worked hard to impose a moratorium on deepwater drilling, which one prominent expert says could directly result in a loss of $2.1 billion in output, nearly $100 million in forfeited tax revenue, and close to 10,000 mostly middle-class job losses.

In addition, the agency responsible for issuing new permits to drill in the Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”) has issued just four permits during the last three months, as compared to 56 permits in the three months prior to that.

(more…)

Last week’s national unemployment numbers demonstrated that the economic recovery President Obama promised us is still a ways away.  In Pennsylvania the unemployment rate increased last month hovering just above 9%.

Given these numbers, the last thing Washington politicians should be doing is supporting legislation that would cost thousands more jobs. But that is exactly what my very liberal opponent, Congressman Joe Sestak, is doing.

Not only did Congressman Sestak sponsor and vote for a cap-and-trade energy tax, he argued that the tax did not go far enough!

A cap-and-trade energy tax would impose an onerous indirect tax on the production and consumption of carbon-based energy. It would cap the amount of carbon dioxide businesses could emit, impose a penalty when the cap is exceeded, and would require that carbon emissions be cut by 20 percent of 2005 levels by 2020.

Independent studies have found that this would cost the country millions of jobs, but in an industrial state like Pennsylvania, the cap-and-trade tax would be even more harmful than elsewhere. Our state’s coal, natural gas and manufacturing industries would be especially hard hit.

(more…)

California’s Air Resources Board (CARB)—long considered a foe of conservatives nationwide— has shelled out close to $800,000 to bolster its latest pet “green” initiative, Capitol Confidential has learned.

A study released last month, which draws positive conclusions regarding CARB’s favored “feebates” program, cost a whopping $796,641 according to a document found at CARB’s own site.  That has some observers scrutinizing CARB’s activities thinking it could come under renewed and sustained criticism.

California is currently mired in a fiscal morass that seems almost intractable, with many in the Golden State blaming overspending by government for the state’s fiscal woes.  Assembly Democrats have proposed plugging the state’s budget hole via $9 billion in loans, whereas Senate Democrats want to suspend $2 billion in corporate tax reductions, among other measures; the state budget deficit, meanwhile, is reportedly as big as $19 billion.

The “feebates” program is a CARB priority, however.  The agency sees slapping a tax on new, higher-emissions cars purchased by Californians, while offering a rebate on new, lower-emissions cars, as a key to combating climate change.

(more…)

For those of you who watched “Hannity” on Fox News last night and wondered why an “eco-entrepreneur” was left to address President Obama’s claim that the Gulf spill just means we need his cap-n-trade scheme, with no other guest, it was because a storm here in Central Virginia had me all made up pretty and sitting in the chair with the satellite connections fried out.

That was global warming, of course. Or George Bush.

But here is essentially the rejoinder that you would have heard:

Obama’s argument made in Pittsburgh goes that, with BP having been reckless and the administration incompetent…if you carry the 1 and tally it up it means a massive new tax increase on all of us to make energy more expensive.

This just makes sense in the land of never letting a crisis go to waste.

Which should remind us how to know there’s no good reason for an agenda: when the reason for the agenda, or rather the excuse, keeps changing. Now the global warming tax, which was then a climate change tax, then somehow a job-creation energy tax is now an energy tax to show how engaged and angry President Obama is at BP’s oil spill.

(more…)

What is Cap-and-Trade? Cap-and-Trade is a political scheme ostensibly aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions with the goal of reducing the global temperatures.

With a Cap-and-Trade law in place, the government would set a yearly greenhouse gas emission target (carbon dioxide is the most common man-made greenhouse gas, you are exhaling right it now) and would reduce that yearly ceiling over time.  This is the “Cap” of Cap-and-Trade.

The “Trade” part of this scheme comes in when the government (read: politicians) gives out greenhouse gas emission credits, valued at billions of dollars, to favored industries.  So, industries with greater credits than emissions would be able to sell their valuable credits (basically, a right to emit greenhouse gases) to those industries (such as the coal industry or the oil and gas industries) which would need the credits to stay in business.

Over time, the government makes money, commodities traders make money, such as those on the Chicago Climate Exchange (yes, it exists, they make money trading carbon dioxide credits), politically favored industries make money (such as those former Vice President Al Gore has invested over $100 million in), and the rest of us get hit with the bill – up to $2,000 per family per year of higher energy costs. Thus, Cap-and-Trade is actually a huge energy tax on working Americans.

(more…)