Vulnerable New Jersey Democrat Rep. Tom Malinowski said during a recent town hall that he favors legislation to put a “responsible market price on carbon in the United States,” which researchers claim would cost Americans 36 cents/gallon of gasoline.
Malinowski was asked during a recent town hall with the Sierra Club — an environmental activist group that supports far-left policies — if he saw “a path forward for carbon price, ideally with carbon cashback to all Americans.”
The congressman, in response, said that he is “for that” and has been a cosponsor of legislation that would enact a tax price hike.
“I think that’s the best way forward is a carbon fee, putting a responsible market price on carbon in the United States,” Malinowski said, captured in a video posted to YouTube. “A border adjustment fee, which is, in effect, the carbon tax for China and India, for the rest of the world.” He claimed that it would also “cost nothing” to the federal budget.
The congressman implied that a “carbon fee” is the “best way forward” — a fee that researchers claim would cost Americans 36 cents/gallon at the pump, even as Americans are facing record-high inflation at 8.5 percent in March — the most significant year-over-year increase since December 1981.
The price of oil rose an astonishing 70.1 percent in a 12-month period through March — and was up 22.3 percent from February. Motor fuel was also up 48.2 percent in the last 12 months, 19.8 percent from just February.
The Tax Policy Center explained the “carbon tax” as a tax that “puts a price on [carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas] emissions, encouraging people, businesses, and governments to produce less of them,” and suggested that the tax mainly affects energy-heavy industries and lower-income households.
The Tax Policy Center wrote:
A carbon tax would increase the price of burning fossil fuels and any resulting goods or services. A tax of $40 per ton would add about 36 cents to the price of a gallon of gasoline, for example, or about 2 cents to the average price of a kilowatt-hour of electricity (Marron, Toder, and Austin 2015). Higher energy prices would raise costs for industry and households, resulting in lower profits, wages, and consumption. Conversely, however, reduced carbon consumption would lower the real costs of climate change and air pollution. [Emphasis added.]
The impact of a carbon tax would differ among economic groups depending on the extent of energy price changes and on regional energy production and consumption patterns. Clearly, a carbon tax would fall more heavily on workers and investors in carbon-intensive industries as well as on regions that depend heavily on carbon-intensive fuels, particularly coal. [Emphasis added.]
Because low-income households consume a more energy-intensive basket of goods than do wealthier households, a carbon tax would be regressive; it would cost poorer households a higher share of their income than wealthier households (Marron, Toder, and Austin 2015). A carbon tax of $20 per ton would account for about 0.8 percent of pretax income for households in the lowest income quintile, as compared to 0.5 percent for the highest income quintile. [Emphasis added.]
Since the Democrats have taken power in Washington, both Congress and Biden have taken aim at American energy. As most Democrats stood by, Biden canceled the Keystone XL Pipeline, suspended oil and gas leasing, halted federal support for oil and gas projects overseas, and suspended oil drilling leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
The Congressional Leadership Fund press secretary Cally Perkins hammered Malinowski for wanting to raise the price of energy for Americans.
“Americans are paying the price for Democrats’ reckless energy policies and Tom Malinowski wants to make it even worse,” said Perkins.