Should Congress Express That a Carbon Tax Would Hurt the Economy? (H. Con. Res. 119)

What is H. Con. Res. 119?

(Updated February 29, 2020)

This resolution would express Congress’ opposition to a federal carbon tax due to concerns that it would raise prices on essentials like food, gasoline, and electricity while having a negative impact on U.S. economic growth. In general, a carbon tax seeks to reduce emissions by taxing carbon-based fossil fuels like coal, oil, or natural gas at a given stage of the fuel’s product lifecycle.

While there are no impending votes on legislation that would impose a carbon tax, the lawmakers supporting this resolution outlined their specific concerns that such a policy:

• Would impact the budgets of families and consumers across the board through higher prices, but would especially harm the poor, the elderly, and those on fixed incomes;

• Would increase the cost of all goods manufactured in the U.S. while restricting the global competitiveness of America’s economy;

• Would restrict domestic energy production and inhibit or reverse the job creation and investment that the energy industry has contributed to the U.S. economy.

As a concurrent resolution, this legislation could be passed by both chambers of Congress, but it wouldn’t go to the president’s desk for a signature as it wouldn’t have the force of law.

Argument in favor

Lawmakers need to call out bad ideas and stand against them before they gain traction. There are valid concerns that imposing a carbon tax would raise prices for consumers and hurt the U.S. economy as a result.

Argument opposed

Congress shouldn’t waste its time expressing opposition to a proposal that isn’t being seriously advanced at this point in time anyway. Besides, a carbon tax is a good idea and would help the U.S. deal with climate change.

Impact

Americans who would be affected by a carbon tax; lawmakers that support a carbon tax; and Congress.

Cost of H. Con. Res. 119

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) introduced this resolution to give Congress an opportunity to oppose attempts to enact a carbon tax in the U.S., which he believes would be detrimental to the economy:

“Working with President Trump, this Congress is leading America toward energy dominance and strong economic growth, yet some liberal Washington special interests continue to pursue a radical agenda that includes imposing a job-killing carbon tax, which would raise costs on everything we buy from electricity and gasoline to food and everyday household products. The resolution I’m introducing today with Congressman McKinley would yet again put Congress on record against a carbon tax, which would result in massive job losses, lead to higher prices for American families and small businesses, and jeopardize America’s energy security. I applaud President Trump for reversing eight years of failed energy policy, and finally putting America on a strong path to energy dominance and economic security for all Americans. Our resolution will affirm the position of Congress that a carbon tax would run counter to the goals of American energy dominance and national security."

Proponents of a carbon tax argue that dealing with climate change will be a costly endeavor no matter what, and that it could be a more efficient way of reducing emissions. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) has advocated for a carbon tax since his election in 2014, and thinks it could still have a future:

“Republicans tend to hate regulations... And yet, putting a carbon tax in place could, in many ways, be a more efficient way to accomplish these goals, and with more flexibility.”

This legislation has the support of 42 cosponsors, all of whom are Republicans.

Of Note: Back in August 2013 the House passed legislation that would have prevented the White House from imposing a carbon tax without congressional approval, but it failed to receive a vote in the Senate before the end of the 113th Congress.

There is no federal carbon tax on the books in the U.S., although such taxes have been implemented to a limited degree at the state and local level.

Media:

• Sponsoring Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) Press Release
  
• The Hill
  
• The Washington Examiner
  
• American Commitment (In Favor)
  
• Citizens’ Climate Lobby (Opposed)
  
• Competitive Enterprise Institute (In Favor)