Expressing the Sense of Congress That A Carbon Tax Would Be Detrimental to the United States Economy

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to these two resolutions.

The first one, H. Con. Res. 89, says that a carbon tax would necessarily be detrimental to the United States economy. This is false. Plain and simple.

The truth is that we can and we must design carbon pollution reduction strategies to spur advancements in clean energy technology, reduce carbon pollution, and fight climate change.

These strategies, including a carbon tax or a fee, can easily be designed to be revenue-neutral, and we know from long experience at the State and Federal level that fighting pollution is good for jobs and good for the economy. California is a perfect example. If anyone has questions about this, come to California, where you will see that climate leadership is actually also good economics.

It doesn't seem to matter to my colleagues who have offered these resolutions. In the year 2016, they continue to deny the reality of climate change. Literally, our friends across the aisle are the last policymakers on the planet Earth to hold this view. Even in other oil- producing companies, the conservative parties in those countries acknowledge climate change, and they have positions in their party platforms that acknowledge we need to do something about it.

Now, the other resolution, H. Con. Res. 112, similarly demonstrates a lack of leadership by opposing President Obama's proposal to finance infrastructure investments. Those who don't support the President's infrastructure financing mechanism, I think, have a responsibility to offer their own solutions for our infrastructure crisis. This bill doesn't do that. Instead, it simply describes a desire to support Big Oil.

So here we have it: climate denial; the party that doesn't want to fill vacancies on the Supreme Court; a party that doesn't want to do its job to respond to public health crises, like Zika; a party that prefers not to offer any solutions on our critical infrastructure funding needs.

Is this how we are going to make America great again?

I don't think so. Let's move forward in the 21st century and not let our energy and infrastructure policies be driven by 18th century thinking.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose both of these bills.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source