A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the economy of the United States.

Bill: 118-sconres-23
Sponsor: full_name: Sen. Cassidy, Bill [R-LA]
Introduced: 2023-10-26
Policy area: Taxation
Latest action: action_date: 2023-10-26
text: Referred to the Committee on Finance. (text: CR S5219)

Summaries:
action_date: 2023-10-26
action_desc: Introduced in Senate
text: <p>This concurrent resolution expresses the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to families and businesses and would severely harm the economic and national security of the country.</p>

tv_txt: III 118th CONGRESS 1st Session S. CON. RES. 23 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES October 26, 2023 Mr. Cassidy (for himself, Mr. Cramer , Mr. Lee , Mr. Cornyn , Mr. Risch , Mr. Ricketts , Mr. Marshall , Mr. Barrasso , Mr. Hoeven , Ms. Lummis , Mr. Rounds , Mr. Budd , Mr. Lankford , Mr. Cruz , and Mrs. Hyde-Smith ) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Finance CONCURRENT RESOLUTION Expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the economy of the United States.

Whereas a carbon tax is a regressive domestic Federal tax on carbon dioxide released in the United States; Whereas a carbon tax will— (1) discourage manufacturing and energy production in the United States; (2) lead to more jobs and businesses moving overseas; (3) lead to less economic growth; (4) restrict the global competitiveness of the United States; and (5) primarily harm the working-class families of the United States; Whereas the ingenuity of the United States in energy development practices has increased the availability of the energy resources of the United States and lowered the pollution associated with extracting and producing these energy resources; Whereas the energy policy of the United States should encourage continued private sector innovation and development and not increase the existing tax burden on manufacturers; Whereas the production of the energy resources of the United States projects geopolitical strength and increases the ability of the United States to maintain a competitive advantage in the global economy; Whereas the loss of jobs and businesses to countries overseas— (1) serves to weaken the supply chain security of the United States; and (2) represents a threat to the economic security and economic and social development of the United States; Whereas the only countries that stand to benefit as a result of the United States implementing a carbon tax are countries that ignore responsible development and lower prices of manufacturing by polluting without consequence; Whereas the United States most pressing strategic rival, China, stands to benefit the most from the United States choosing to undercut domestic industry through a carbon tax; Whereas China, by far the world’s largest polluter, accounts for approximately 30 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions and subsidizes its exports by not imposing or enforcing reasonable environmental or labor standards; Whereas, even without a carbon tax, manufacturers in the United States are forced to compete with companies in China and elsewhere that face few limits on how much they pollute; Whereas, without a carbon tax, the United States, domestic energy producers, and domestic manufacturers have reduced greenhouse gas emissions more than any other economy since 2005; Whereas a carbon tax would undercut the ability of manufacturers in the United States to invest in further development and other efforts that would continue to voluntarily reduce pollution in their operations; Whereas it is inconceivable that the United States Government would punish the workers and manufacturers of the United States with a carbon tax despite the United States standing as a global leader in relation to the environmental performance of its industry; Whereas the loss of jobs and businesses to countries overseas serves to result in greater pollution; Whereas more production in the United States is also a benefit to the environment by preventing the expansion of less efficient production in other countries like China; Whereas anti-carbon tax, pro-growth solutions can reverse the trend of the people of the United States being left behind economically; and Whereas the Congress and the President should focus on pro-growth solutions that encourage increased development of domestic resources: Now, therefore, be it

That it is the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the families and businesses of the United States while severely harming the economic and national security of the United States.