IV 
112TH CONGRESS 
2D SESSION 
H. CON. RES. 142 
Expressing the opposition of Congress to Federal efforts to establish a carbon 
tax on fuels for electricity and transportation. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
NOVEMBER 30, 2012 
Mr. MCKINLEY (for himself, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. UPTON, Mr. PETERSON, Mr. 
WHITFIELD, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. SHIMKUS, and 
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio) submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 
Expressing the opposition of Congress to Federal efforts 
to establish a carbon tax on fuels for electricity and 
transportation. 
Whereas affordable and abundant electricity from coal and 
natural gas is a strategic resource that is essential to 
modern life, America’s economic competitiveness, and, ul-
timately, independence from foreign and volatile sources 
of energy; 
Whereas the application of a carbon tax to gasoline and other 
transportation fuels will have a dramatic, immediate im-
pact on transportation costs, with the greatest impact 
being felt by low-income Americans and their families; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
22:55 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6300
E:\BILLS\HC142.IH
HC142
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
•HCON 142 IH 
Whereas a carbon tax is designed to result in substantial, im-
mediate increases in the price of electricity, making elec-
tricity less affordable for millions of Americans; 
Whereas a carbon tax applicable to coal and natural gas elec-
tricity generation would be punitive and harmful to the 
American people by artificially raising electricity costs; 
Whereas, with continuing high national joblessness and an 
unemployment rate exceeding 7.8 percent every month 
since February 2009, a carbon tax will drive the unem-
ployment rate even higher; 
Whereas a carbon tax is likely to have an uneven effect, hit-
ting different regions of the country and segments of the 
economy much more severely than others; 
Whereas a carbon tax is regressive and will impose the great-
est burden on low-income individuals and families who al-
ready spend the largest share of their income on energy 
and are least able to afford a carbon tax; 
Whereas economic modeling of Australia’s recently imple-
mented carbon tax shows that it increases energy costs, 
and reduces growth in GDP, productivity, and household 
incomes; 
Whereas a carbon tax in the United States will have no im-
pact on China, India, and other major sources of carbon 
emissions throughout the world, except to increase their 
competitiveness with the United States; and 
Whereas a carbon tax will put United States exporters at a 
competitive disadvantage by increasing domestic manu-
facturing production costs: Now, therefore, be it 
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
concurring), That Congress opposes Federal efforts to es-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
22:55 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\HC142.IH
HC142
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with
•HCON 142 IH 
tablish a carbon tax on fuels for electricity and transpor-
tation. 
Æ 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
22:55 Nov 30, 2012
Jkt 029200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\HC142.IH
HC142
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with