The Daily Gamecock

Opinion: Carbon tax business-friendly approach to climate change

The Monroe Power Plant in Monroe, Michigan, consists of four generating units built in the early 1970s. The plant is a large source of emissions of carbon dioxide, a heat-trapping gas that accumulates in the atmosphere. According to federal data, it produced 19.4 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2008, the ninth largest amount among U.S. power plants. (Renee Schoof/TNS)
The Monroe Power Plant in Monroe, Michigan, consists of four generating units built in the early 1970s. The plant is a large source of emissions of carbon dioxide, a heat-trapping gas that accumulates in the atmosphere. According to federal data, it produced 19.4 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2008, the ninth largest amount among U.S. power plants. (Renee Schoof/TNS)

Lamenting the deeply divided state of American politics in the 21st century is so commonplace that it has almost become cliche. The partisan divide on many issues is so deeply entrenched that real reform seems nearly impossible, with ideologues on both sides content with having the debates go around in endless circles and allowing Washington to fall into gridlock hell. While division on many issues is understandable, one topic that simply doesn’t deserve its highly politicized status is the environment.  

Though one would never guess it from listening to today’s dogmatic conservative talk show hosts, climate change used to be an issue that was seen as bipartisan and without any deep political connotations. The transformation of climate change from a scientific issue to a political one really doesn’t make sense when one considers the facts. The majority of Americans, including those in red states, believe that climate change is occurring, and the scientific community has reached a clear consensus that climate change is a problem that needs addressing. 

By choosing to vociferously oppose any and all climate action, the GOP has alienated itself from the average American and has been reduced to an anti-science party that seems to defy common sense in the name of ideological purity. This is too bad, because there are ways of addressing climate issues that are in line with the conservative positions of free markets and limited government.  

Take for instance carbon taxes. While many conservatives instinctively balk at any notion of raising taxes, carbon taxes are believed by some economists to be a way of actually reducing the overall extent of government meddling in the economy while simultaneously serving to protect the environment. A conservative group calling itself the Climate Leadership Council has proposed a carbon tax plan that is revenue-neutral, meaning that despite the tax, the government won’t actually receive any more money as the policy includes paying taxpayers back with dividends to offset the costs of higher carbon prices. 

With such a tax in place, it would also be possible to roll back the Obama-era EPA regulations that so many conservatives loathe. The possibility of rolling back those regulations has earned the carbon tax proposal the unlikely support from the CEO of Exxon Mobile, with the reasoning that a tax on emissions is overall far less burdensome to industry than a proliferation of suffocating regulations.  

Conservative pro-market parties elsewhere in the world have already embraced the carbon tax approach. In 2008, the British Columbia Liberal Party, a party that is somewhat analogous to our own GOP, introduced a wildly popular carbon tax that proved efficient in reducing carbon emissions while not hampering economic activity in the slightest. Another potential market-based solution is a cap-and-trade system, which has proven to be very cost effective and successful in reducing emissions without killing businesses. It is possible to protect the environment without ruining the economy.  

Seeing American conservatives shoot themselves in the foot by refusing to even consider these options out of sheer stubbornness can be infuriating if you’re right of center and care about the environment. At this point, the science is largely settled, and the GOP is losing face by ignoring the issue. By refusing to consider effective ways of preventing climate change, the GOP has effectively allowed the Democrats to present themselves as the party of science and common sense environmentalism. Refusing to combat climate change does nothing for the GOP, and the party will have to abandon its current stance if it wants to remain relevant in the future.


Comments