Whew! That's a long post and it has bullet points, so I figured I'd respond to each bullet point on whether I like it or not to see if I'm really against this thing like I have said I am. Here are the results:
I'm "For" 15 of the items. "Against" 9 of the items. And 7 others I either couldn't understand from this guys rant or I only saw the need for it in the context of necessary overhead from a program that would have been much simpler if we'd just done a carbon tax. One other observation. The below is not a comprehensive picture. He just picks out things he didn't like and expands on them. For example, I know that the bill has a $20B allocation to R&D for electric vehicles. I am 100% for investments like that. So I suspect, that I may actually be for 30-40% of the provisions of this bill, if I were to look at everything. I would have still voted against it, though, if given the opportunity.
===============================
• It creates massive new regulatory structures for all power generation and power transmission systems.
mindmeld => This is why I didn't like Cap and Trade...it comes with new massive overhead. But if we're going to be forced into Cap and Trade, then I'd rather have regulation than not.
• It creates hundreds of new bureaucracies that benefit Obama's contributors; for example, it creates a "Development Corporation for Renewable Power Borrowing Authority" that issues "Community Building Code Administration Grants" under a "Low Income Community Sustainable Development Capacity Grant Program". This scam serves two purposes: it rewards failed housing programs like those run by Presidential Adviser Valerie Jarrett; it also provides yet another spigot of funds -- in blocks of $1,000,000 -- for groups like ACORN.
mindmeld => waste of money
• It creates and regulates every building code in the country and will purposefully overrule any "city, county, parish, city and county authority, or city and parish authority having local authority to enforce building codes and regulations and to collect fees for building permits."
mindmeld => not a bad idea. very expensive, but our buildings are extreme energy hogs. conservation has to be part of the equation, if we are to be more responsible consumers of energy
• It reaches into every neighborhood by eradicating "any private covenant, contract provision, lease provision, homeowners' association rule or bylaw, or similar restriction" to force localities to accept "green technologies" whether it fits in the neighorhood or not.
mindmeld => same as above
• It touches every aspect of water and sewer systems by regulating every "residential water efficient product or service"; ensuring those offerings are rated and forcing state government, local or county government, tribal government, wastewater or sewerage utility, municipal water authority, energy utility, water utility, or nonprofit organization to comply.
mindmeld => not sure what purpose this serves
• It creates revolving loan facilities for "Certified manufacturing clean energy facilities", which provide $500 million blocks of taxpayer dough to promote green manufacturing. Of course, it does so using wages dictated by the Secretary of Labor under the Davis-Bacon Act, a New Deal-era payoff to the unions.
mindmeld => this is also not a bad idea. already, I have seen some of my clients start adding solar cells and wind power to their manufacturing facilities to help generate power. Incentives to move folks over will lower our manufacturing base's cost structure over time. these things have a positive ROI for the economy, especially since these companies are long lived organizations that can afford long payback periods.
• It funds propaganda to ensure that generations of students are brainwashed to believe that carbon dioxide is a toxin. It directs the Secretary of Energy to issue grants to colleges and universities to "study consumer actions to conserve energy", rate effectiveness of consumer education, determine how best to regulate consumers, etc.
mindmeld => this is an excellent idea. I have traveled extensively in Japan where the culture and education is focus on energy conservation. Every business and every person is hyper conscious of how they use energy and they build from inception to conserve. That lowers their cost structure on everything. We should do the same. I'd shift the conversation from CO2 as a pollutant to ENERGY CONSERVATION as the topic for education, though. But I think the author is using CO2 as propaganda, because the quote actually talks about energy conservation, not CO2.
• It impacts civil aviation with new restrictions and regulations.
mindmeld => not enough info to know what this means.
• It controls construction of all buildings, residential and non-residential alike, ensuring that every structure "complies with... energy efficiency requirements, standards, checklists or ratings systems..."
mindmeld => Good idea, as I've explained above.
• It mandates "Energy audits" to ensure that a "Green Gestapo" checks to ensure that homeowners and businesses aren't bypassing regulations.
mindmeld => This is important in our conservation efforts. Good idea.
• Somehow, it also provides grants (welfare) for tenants in multi-family buildings.
mindmeld => Waste of money.
• It defines "energy-efficient mortgages" (with our favorite GSEs, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, so what could possibly go wrong?) that artificially boosts the income of the borrower based upon how much "green technology" is employed. In other words, the Democrats are socially engineering mortgage underwriting standards again, just as they did in the nineties, which will lead to yet another financial disaster.
mindmeld => I have no idea what this means.
• It also artificially raises maximum mortgage loan amounts based upon green improvements and can reduce down payment requirements.
mindmeld => This is a bad idea. Maximum mortgage loan amounts and downpayments should be a factor of credit worthiness of the individual, not what the building construction consists of.
• It will fund "tree planting organizations" (can't you just smell the ACORN-scented fraud?), landscapers and others with taxpayer funds.
mindmeld => Not sure why this is needed. They already have plenty of profit incentive.
• It creates new real estate appraisal processes, new training mandates for appraisers and, through an "Appraisal Subcommittee", describes new standards for all real estate valuations based upon green considerations.
mindmeld => There are some green calculations that real estate agents need to be informed of. For example, a house that gets all its power from solar panels should be valued higher than one without that, because of the savings on electricity.
• It creates an "Alternative Energy Sources State Loan Fund", controlled by another presidential appointee (HUD), to loan money to states for alternative energy projects. Each state or Indian tribe is eligible to receive up to $500,000,000 of taxpayer dough.
mindmeld => Excellent idea. This will spur more green energy projects.
• It creates "Green Banking Centers", which mandates federal financial agencies and regulatory bodies to provide "green housing information" to anyone seeking a mortgage, a home improvement loan, a home equity loan, or similar products. A new, federal job role called "energy rater" will exist; and will be used to provide guidance and ensure compliance around energy efficiency.
mindmeld => Not a bad idea. Education is key.
• It will also require reporting by the GAO on "affordable mortgages".
mindmeld => Not sure this is useful to the green movement.
• It creates a "secondary market for residential renewable energy lease instruments" that will "encourage private investment in the green economy." HUD will determine the residual value all "all renewable energy assets" in order to facilitate a secondary market.
mindmeld => Excellent idea. It will spur renewable energy investment.
• HUD will also "guarantee" the "green portion" of all mortgages issued under the guidelines, which will consist of as much as 10% of each mortgage.
mindmeld => Excellent idea. It will spur renewable energy investment.
• It empowers the Secretary of Agriculture to interfere with farming markets and processes to promote "green technologies".
mindmeld => Excellent idea. It will spur renewable energy investment.
• It defines trading systems of carbon offset credits, term offset credits, emission allowances, compensatory allowances, and similar "currencies" operated by new government-sponsored entities. These "carbon derivative markets" will support the taxation and monetization of all entities required to conform to the new rules.
mindmeld => This is another reason why I was against this thing. It creates the need for a massive new commodity market where fraud risk is sky high. So then you need a massive gov't entity to regulate it. Sigh.
• It affects every industry in America using "tonnage of production" measures; requiring each industry to calculate its "trade intensity" and "greenhouse gas intensity". The administrators of the program will compare other countries emissions by industry (how those numbers are achieved aren't spelled out) to U.S. industries in order to punish or reward companies on an industry basis.
mindmeld => Most of US industry already measures this stuff.
• It will guide all treaty law with other countries, using measures such as "competitive imbalances that lead to carbon leakage" as trade levers.
mindmeld => Necessary if this is to work. It can't be a silo'd effort. But more costly than a simple tax. This is the overhead I talk about.
• It will create -- with the U.S. Customs Department -- an "International Reserve Allowance Program" (IRAP) that will facilitate the trade, sale, purchase, exchange, transfer and banking of international reserve allowances. All material leaving and entering the country will engage with IRAP to ensure the equitable international balance of carbon leakage.
mindmeld => Necessary, but this is the overhead I talk about.
• It will create a "USDA Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction and Sequestration Advisory Committee" to oversee new regulation of farmlands.
mindmeld => Necessary, but this is the overhead I talk about.
• It will spend $150,000,000 on an "Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Worker Training Fund", which will involve the Secretaries of Education, Housing and Labor, and appears to be a funnel of money flowing directly to union bosses.
mindmeld => EXCELLENT idea. This is exactly the kind of thing we need to do to prepare our people for a transition. Any effort on renewable energy means creative destruction. That means new green jobs, but loss of fossil fuel jobs. So re-education is necessary.
• It will spend millions on a "Green Construction Careers Demonstration Project", a boondoggle of the first order and another payoff to union bosses.
mindmeld => Same as above.
• It modifies the Earned Income Credit portion of the tax code, providing massive new welfare payments to the poor; and which adjusts for inflation.
mindmeld => Waste of money.
• It moves these billions in new expenses into programs that govern every aspect of human life including, but not limited to, farming; fertilizers; animal husbandry and animal diets; feedstock; soil; land use (forested, cleared, wetlands, etc); "manure management"; and creates gigantic new government bureaucracies (unionized, of course) to regulate, monitor and control American citizens.
mindmeld => A transfer of our economy from fossil fuels to green energy requires a massive, pervasive effort. It's not about controlling citizens, but rather focusing our country on conservation methods and renewable energy. This is necessary. |
