The Stanly News and Press (Albemarle, NC)

Opinion & Letters to the Editor

June 9, 2014

Left tallies 'true cost' of coal with a political calculator

Editor's note: CNHI newspapers that are not weekly subscribers to Taylor Armerding's column may publish this one if they notify him at t.armerding@verizon.net.

Why shouldn’t Americans – in their homes and businesses – have to pay the “true cost” of energy from its various sources?

That is one of the more compelling arguments coming from those who applaud the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 645-page orgy of regulations issued a week ago. The regs, they cheer, finally will force operators of coal-burning power plants to build into their rate structure the cost of belching greenhouse gases and other pollutants into the air.

Yes, that would cause the price of coal to rise. It would thus make clean energy alternatives – wind, solar, hydro – more competitive, moving us into a healthier future that would lower the risk of climate change. (I guess the newer politically correct euphemism is “climate disruption.")

Well, maybe. All sorts of promises are being thrown about, as there are every time President Obama launches yet another initiative to grow the size and power of government.

It will cut carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. electricity generation by 30 percent by 2030 from 2005 levels! It will cut the number of childhood asthma attacks by 140,000! It will prevent at least 2,700 premature deaths! It will cut the number of work and school days lost to illness by nearly 500,000! And all of those benefits will save the American economy $25 billion to $62 billion annually - $7 in health benefits for every $1 invested!

But those benefits, even if they equal the promises, are a bit more modest given some context. The projected reduction in asthma attacks amounts to about 3.2 percent. The projected reduction in carbon dioxide emissions won’t even equal the worldwide increase in emissions from coal each year.

And, actually, nobody really knows for sure. A prediction about almost anything even five years out is a guess. Predictions 16 years out are little more than propaganda, no matter what side of the debate you’re on.

Coal advocates claim the new regulations will eliminate thousands of jobs, lower the average household income by $200 and cost businesses $50 billion annually. They don’t really know, either.

The point about paying the “true cost” of something is a fair one, however. If the cost of a product is subsidized by taxpayers, directly or indirectly, people will purchase more of it than they might otherwise, and competing technologies that might be better for the long-term health of the environment or economy will be at a disadvantage.

So, why not require that we pay the true cost of everything? This would seem to comport nicely with Obama’s regular declarations that this should be a country where “everybody pays their fair share, and everybody plays by the same rules.”

But the idea of expanding the “pay-the-true-cost-of-coal” philosophy into other areas sends the Obama administration and my liberal friends running for the hills. The real Obama philosophy is the Orwellian “everybody is equal, but some people are more equal than others.”

For starters, paying the true cost of everything would mean no more subsidies for energy darlings. No more hundreds of millions for manufacturers of solar panels or wind turbines. No more tax breaks for putting solar panels on your building or house.

Once we go beyond energy sources, it gets even more uncomfortable. Why should "homeowners” (as one of my friends used to say, “I don’t own ‘my’ home. The bank does.”) get a tax deduction for their mortgage payments? That’s cutting the “true cost,” and encourages people to buy bigger homes than they could otherwise afford, which then cost more to heat and cool, thus contributing to climate disruption.

Then there is rampant ignoring of the “true cost” of business failures, embraced by Obama to benefit select groups – his trade union allies – to the point of flouting the law.

As has been well documented, the government’s bailout of General Motors and Chrysler cost taxpayers an estimated $17 billion to $20 billion because the Obama administration, while it did demand that the companies go through bankruptcy, allowed the United Auto Workers to recover far more than secured and other unsecured creditors, in violation of bankruptcy law.

The companies were going broke in large measure because of inflated wage and benefit costs that were not even close to competitive. But instead of forcing the “true cost” of that excess on the companies and the union, the administration shielded them from it.

Under the plan imposed by our “everybody-plays-by-the-same-rules” president, Chrysler’s secured creditors were forced to accept 29 cents on the dollar; other unsecured creditors got nothing; and the UAW recovered most of the value of its unsecured claims.

And that, of course, protected the union from one of the most effective ways to bring a company out of a fantasy world, back to reality and viability. Bankruptcy law allows courts to throw out and rewrite existing union contracts; to eliminate unsustainable pay, benefits and work rules; and to make a company competitive without having to be propped up by more subsidies.

The UAW made some minor concessions, but those mostly applied to future employees and were not even close to what was needed. Indeed, a UAW memo to members said, “For our active members, these tentative changes mean no loss in your base hourly pay, no reduction in your healthcare, and no reduction in pensions.”

So much for requiring people to pay the “true cost” of their choices. The concept is a worthy one, but not if it is going to be so selectively, and politically, applied.

Taylor Armerding is an independent columnist. Contact him at t.armerding@verizon.net

1
Text Only
Opinion & Letters to the Editor
  • Brent Laurenz Special election adds to the mix

    RALEIGH – A busy slate of judicial elections this November got even busier recently when Judge John Martin of the N.C. Court of Appeals announced his retirement.
    A special statewide election to fill Martin’s seat will be added to the general election ballot, joining the four N.C. Supreme Court seats and three N.C. Court of Appeals races already slated for this fall.

    July 25, 2014 1 Photo

  • Patrick Gannon Fake news or sign of some more trouble?

    RALEIGH – Of the three situations I can recall where agencies receiving large sums of taxpayer dollars wouldn’t divulge employees’ salaries, two of them ended badly. The third – involving a group of charter schools in Southeastern North Carolina – is playing out right now.

    July 25, 2014 1 Photo

  • Almost half of America's obese youth don't know they're obese

    WASHINGTON - The good news is that after decades of furious growth, obesity rates finally seem to be leveling off in the U.S.. The bad news is that America's youth still appear to be dangerously unaware of the problem.

    July 23, 2014

  • Darth Vader is polling higher than all potential 2016 presidential candidates

    On the other hand, with a net favorability of -8, Jar Jar is considerably more popular than the U.S. Congress, which currently enjoys a net favorability rating of -65.

    July 23, 2014

  • D.G. Martin Where did all these new voters in North Carolina come from?

    “Voters born elsewhere make up nearly half of N.C. electorate.”
    So begins the latest DataNet report from the UNC Program on Public Life, directed by former journalist Ferrel Guillory.

    July 23, 2014 1 Photo

  • Patrick Gannon Some light for Dems in their time of darkness

    RALEIGH – Earlier this year, state Sen. Ben Clark, a Hoke County Democrat, became a hero for a day among his party and environmentalists when his amendment to require more well water testing near future fracking sites passed the Senate. It even gained the support of a number of GOP senators, against the wishes of the Republican bill sponsor.

    July 23, 2014 1 Photo

  • mama.jpg What we get wrong about millennials living at home

    If the media is to be believed, America is facing a major crisis. "Kids," some age 25, 26, or even 30 years old, are living out of their childhood bedrooms and basements at alarmingly high numbers. The hand-wringing overlooks one problem: It's all overblown.

    July 22, 2014 1 Photo

  • Doug Creamer Maintaining hope

    Gardeners are facing challenges with the weather this year. It seemed like we were getting great conditions in April and May. The weather was warm and we were getting some good rains. Then sometime in June the rain stopped. It got so dry that I didn’t have to cut the grass. While I enjoyed the break, the garden was not happy at all. I was having to water quite a bit to keep the vegetable garden alive and growing.

    July 22, 2014 1 Photo

  • Jason O. Boyd I may be a bit behind the times, but at least I can find ‘America’

    I seem to be reading about and dealing with technology a lot lately.
    I  love technology and have always been fascinated by gadgets of all kinds and the wonderful things they can do. You never seem to go through an entire day without some form of invention enhancing your life.

    July 21, 2014 1 Photo

  • Brent Laurenz Meeting out in open helps negotiations move ahead

    RALEIGH – State lawmakers reconvened in Raleigh on May 14 promising a brief legislative session this summer, but as July moves along they are still in town and tackling big issues.

    July 21, 2014 1 Photo

House Ads
Seasonal Content