ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Learn about Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Learn about Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act

| Wednesday, December 12, 2018 10:03 a.m

On Nov. 27, the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (EICD) was introduced in the House by both Democratic and Republican members of Congress. Here’s why that is good news:

• The Congressional Budget Office will do its analysis of the legislation so everyone will have the same numbers as the bill works its way through the legislative process;

• Its mechanism matches the carbon fee and dividend process that Citizens’ Climate Lobby has been advocating for for 10 years; implementation would mean that the United States would more than meet its obligations under the Paris climage agreement reached in 2015;

• The Yale Climate Opinion Maps published in August find that over two-thirds of Americans think that fossil fuel companies should pay a “carbon tax”;

• Most American families would come out ahead financially — the dividend received monthly will more than offset the increase in cost of carbon-based products.

COP24 — the 24th Conference of the Parties — is now meeting in a “coal town” in Poland to work out next steps for achieving the goals of the Paris agreement. In the meantime, there have been riots in France because of a proposed increase in the gasoline/diesel tax; an initiative on the ballot in Washington State that would have “put a price on carbon” was defeated. Why?

Neither proposal included paying the proceeds of the fossil fuel tax to families in the form of a monthly dividend. EICD does; and that makes all the difference in the world.

Learn more at .

Bruce Cooper 

Adams Township, Butler County

The writer is group leader of the regional chapter of Citizens Climate Lobby based in Slippery Rock.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.