One Response to Sen. Gregg (R-NH) opposes “massive new consumption tax” unless it offsets other taxes 1-for-1
In the past I have supported similar efforts … Lieberman-McCain, Carper-Alexander.
This bill is much bigger.
He is very ambivalent about the bill, attracted to some parts, questions other parts.
We might significantly undermine our competitiveness.
The science is not up to speed with the requirements we are putting on industry.
we are putting the cart before the horse.
We need nuclear.
I have very serious concerns. This bill is going to generate $6.7 trillion, and which gets spent for the most part.
This bill will get passed on to consumers in the form of higher electricity bills.
Let’s be honest, this bill creates a massive new consumption tax.
I cannot sign on to taking that money and using it to expand the size of the federal government.
It has to go back to consumers 1-for-1.
WARNER: The money that comes in goes for dealing with the problem of CO2. We’ve got a nuclear amendment. The president has the authority to change anything in this bill.
BOXER: There is no consumption tax. This is based on the acid rain bill and nobody ever called that a tax.