Politifact says 'true' that Obama said, "Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," and voters must be made to understand this is important

.
6/10/2009, "Contends that President Obama "literally said (if) his cap-and-trade proposals were to pass, that utility rates, his words now, would, 'necessarily skyrocket.'" Politifact

"It didn't take us long to find Barack Obama's original quote, which came from a videotaped interview he did with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board very early in the presidential campaign, January 2008.

"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," Obama told the Chronicle . "Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."

While Obama was talking specifically about cap-and-trade, he was also making a larger point that the biggest challenge will be making sure voters understand why such a plan is necessary.

"The problem is can you get the American people to say this is really important," Obama said."...image from politifact

=============================

Obama 'climate change' policies estimated to cost 1 percent of US GDP:

"A second memorandum, which was prepared for Obama's transition team after the November election, says this about climate change policies: "Economic costs will likely be on the order of 1 percent of GDP."

9/15/2009, "Obama Admin: Cap And Trade Could Cost Families $1,761 A Year," CBSNews, Declan McCullagh

"The Obama administration has privately concluded that a cap and trade law would

• cost American taxpayers up to $200 billion a year,

• the equivalent of hiking personal income taxes by about  
• 15 percent.

A previously unreleased analysis prepared by the U.S. Department of Treasury says the total in new taxes would be between $100 billion to $200 billion a year. At the upper end of the administration's estimate, the cost per American household would be an extra $1,761 a year. ...

A second memorandum, which was prepared for Obama's transition team after the November election, says this about climate change policies: "Economic costs will likely be on the order of 1 percent of GDP, making them equal in scale to all existing environmental regulation."

The documents (PDF) were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute and released on Tuesday....

The FOIA'd document written by Judson Jaffe, who joined the Treasury Department's Office of Environment and Energy in January 2009, says: "Given the administration's proposal to auction all emission allowances, a cap-and-trade program could generate federal receipts on the order of $100 to $200 billion annually." (Obviously, any final cap-and-trade system may be different from what Obama had proposed, and could yield higher or lower taxes.)

Because personal income tax revenues bring in around $1.37 trillion a year, a $200 billion additional tax would be the equivalent of a 15 percent increase a year. A $100 billion additional tax would represent a 7 or 8 percent increase a year.

One odd point: The document written by Jaffee includes this line: "It will raise energy prices and impose annual costs on the order of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX." The Treasury Department redacted the rest of the sentence with a thick black line.

The Freedom of Information Act, of course, contains no this-might-embarrass-the-president exemption (nor, for that matter, should federal agencies be in the business of possibly suppressing dissenting climate change voices). You'd hope the presidential administration that boasts of being the "most open and transparent in history" would be more forthcoming than this."

=============================

Peer reviewed science says the subject is moot. CO2 lags temperatures, it doesn't precede them. A thirty-year span was studied, Jan. 1980-Dec. 2011:

Jan. 2013, "The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature," Global and Planetary Change, Ole Humlum^{a, b, ,} ,Kjell Stordahl^c, Jan-Erik Solheim^d

"Fig. 1. Monthly global atmospheric CO₂
(NOOA; green), monthly global sea surface temperature (HadSST2; blue stippled) and monthly global surface air temperature (HadCRUT3; red), since January 1980. Last month shown is December 2011."

"For the period January 1980 to December 2011...Ice cores show atmospheric CO₂ variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale....

In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets:  
1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO₂ data,  2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data,  3) GISS surface air temperature data,  4) NCDC surface air temperature data, 5) HadSST2 sea surface data,  6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series,  7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO₂, and  8) GWP data on volcanic eruptions. ... 
 
The maximum positive correlation between CO₂ and temperature is found for 
 
CO₂ lagging 

11–12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 
9.5–10 months to global surface air temperature, and 
about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. 
The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO₂ is high, but do not explain all observed changes."

==============================

Comment: Why is this crime still going on? Too big to fail, and the US no longer has a two party system providing checks and balances. Both political parties are on the same side.


.