From Fox News:
In 2000 and 2001, while Barack Obama served as a board member for a Chicago-based charitable foundation, he helped to fund a pioneering carbon trading exchange that is likely to fill a critical role in the controversial cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme that President Obama is now trying to push rapidly through Congress.
During those two years, the Joyce Foundation gave nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were instrumental in developing and launching the privately-owned Chicago Climate Exchange, which now calls itself “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”
One of those gases is carbon dioxide, the most ubiquitous greenhouse gas and the focus of the most far-reaching — and contentious — efforts to combat “climate change.” On Monday, Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency declared carbon dioxide a public health threat.
The President of the Joyce Foundation in 2000, when the foundation made its first grant to the Climate Exchange, was Paula DiPerna, who is now executive vice president of the Chicago Climate Exchange in charge of corporate recruitment and public policy, as well as president of CCX International.
DiPerna left the foundation in November 2001 and joined the Exchange. It was the same year in which the foundation gave its second and much larger grant to the exchange. The Exchange finally launched in 2003.
Reached at her office in New York, DiPerna said President Obama, who in 2000 was a candidate for Congress, was involved as a director of the foundation and voted on the proposal but declined to detail that involvement other than that “he read the proposal and voted on the grant.”
She referred subsequent questions to the exchange’s communications office.
In response to questions from FOX News about Obama’s relationship to the project a White House spokesman said “the President has long believed that a market-based cap-and-trade system is the best way to reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions and to promote our energy security. The success of the cap-and-trade approach in reducing acid rain demonstrates that providing incentives for companies to reduce their emissions is effective.”
Obama’s espousal of cap-and-trade, a system that is intended, among other things, to increase the price of fossil fuels and force their replacement by energy sources that produce less greenhouse gases, has drawn fire from many economists as a huge energy tax that will weigh heavily on an economy that is already in steep recession. The price tag has been put high as $2 trillion dollars over eight years. That figure, nearly three times higher than originally projected, was given in a White House briefing to Senate staffers last week and reported by US News and World Report and the Washington Times.
The scheme has also drawn attacks from 28 U.S. Senators, including West Virginia’s Robert Byrd and Michigan’s Carl Levin, both Democrats, who have criticized Obama for floating the idea that he would attach the measure to the current budget reconciliation process, to avoid a filibuster in Congress.
An open letter signed by the dissident senators declared that “enactment of a cap-and-trade regime is likely to influence nearly every feature of the U.S. economy. Legislation so far-reaching should be fully vetted and given appropriate time for debate, something the budget reconciliation process does not allow.”
[…]
Cap-and-trade has been endorsed by many other politicians than Barack Obama, including his presidential rival, John McCain. But the notion remains contentious.
Many economists and environmentalists have argued that a straightforward carbon tax on polluters would be more efficient, less prone to manipulation and more transparent.
The House Ways and Means Committee has recently allowed several experts to testify about other ideas than cap-and-trade. But even they concede it was more a matter putting other ideas on the record than challenging the administration.
Crippling the economy for bad science while enriching your buddies.
The Chicago way.
(h/t College Politico)
Stop politicizing science. The politician Al Gore said that it’s now pointless to debate the science anymore (he having never debated one dissenting scientist on the topic).
WHY DO YOU HATE OUR FRAGILE EARTH MOTHER?
He’s a good man in that he’s better than Stalin!
When the teleprompter isn’t there, he sometimes lets things slip out.
“Under my cap-and-trade plan, electricity prices will necessarily skyrocket.” http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=211663
But you have to admit, if your definition of a “good man” is someone who “will damage this country with bad policies,” Patterico has a point.
Everyone is good, except for Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Dick Chaney and anyone else that doesn’t kiss our ass.
As soon as the article said that the most ubiquitous greenhouse gas is CO2 I had to stop. The most ubiquitous greenhouse gas is water vapor. Hey, let’s eliminate water! Nothing bad will happen I’m sure.
Carbon dioxide is a public health threat! Everyone, quit breathing! Every time you breath out you kill GAIA!
And you know that because? It’s still early in his regime.
What’s infuriating is that most of this new baggage of the Teleprompter Jeebus (Punch-Drunk Paluka of Pennsylvania Avenue?) could have come out well before the election had the Mainstream Media been the least bit curious. Instead, they swooned like besotted schoolgirls.
They always forget the evil bad water vapors.
Spiny,
Our job is to control events, not report them. Once you figure that out you know exactly what we’re going to do in any given situation.
Heck, even our codes of ethics don’t say we’ll strive for honesty or accuracy, just that we won’t try to make money by lying…
Silly other journalists, do try to keep up. The won’t try to make money by lying thing has been out the window since Walter Duranty.
Shhhhh…
You don’t want people to think we’re such shit-weasels that we’d lie about living up to our code of ethics, do you?
What’s infuriating is that most of this new baggage of the Teleprompter Jeebus could have come out well before the election had the Mainstream Media been the least bit curious. Instead, they swooned like besotted schoolgirls.
But they would have had to a) want to know, and b) work — as in reading Stanley Kurtz’ research to know that Obama was on the board of the Joyce Foundation.
Then, they would have had to use Google to find stuff like this in Philanthropy New Digest.
Then they might have found this:
They didn’t want to know.
Where was that senile Robert Byrd dirty socialist piece of shit during the campaign when the prancing Chicago street trash pony was doing his cap n trade minuet for Mr. Soros?
How could anyone other than pragmatic conservatives ( and others unfortunate enough to be born developmentally disabled ) have missed the fact that we lie about living up to our own code of ethics?
pirouette I meant. Gayest president ever.
Shouldn’t you two be out spreading the memo that Rush Limbaugh is the leader of the Republican party and him hoping Obama fails is treason? Get back to work you two. Remember though, next week on the agenda is the economic crisis=war. Do try to keep up.
Oh, they know, alright. Still, a signed confession seems… unwise.
It should be noted though that Robert Byrd is a lot more courageous than useless Meghan’s useless daddy.
Journolist,
We don’t have to spread that one. The pragmatic conservatives will take care of that.
And we will, too!
Well get ready because next week is the big sell on Obama’s quest to be able to take over random businesses unConstitutionally. So make sure you sell sell sell that economic crisis=war because people know that during a war the President needs new powers to prosecute it. This will fit right into our talking points nicely.
Pragmatic Conservatives your job is to actually discuss this like Obama has the power to do it in the first place to provide cover for the conversation. Now everyone get out there and sell this shitsandwich.
Yes sir!!!
We’re on it!
I’d chime in as “OUTLAW! Conservatives,” but I don’t think I’d be saying anything I haven’t already put my own name to.
Fuck all of ya’s–I’m running with the notion that it’s selfish of Americans to expect to retain their 2nd Amendment rights in the face of Mexico’s failings in law enforcement. We can’t let a crisis–even a Mexican one–go to waste!
This is just the thing we need to enable us to pimp for a new “assault weapon” ban…
Maybe we shouldn’t spread ourselves too thin. Destroying the American economy and sending the whole world lurching into thirteenth century barbarism is a tall order.
Yeah, but a culturally-level playing field would be a positive thing, in that case. As citizens of the world, it’s our role–so far as we’re able–to ensure that everyone is equally miserable in that brave new barbarism and that those formerly more fortunate have no discernible advantage.
Chris L person says the most important thing I think…
“Under my cap-and-trade plan, electricity prices will necessarily skyrocket.”
This is trueness, and also the dirty socialists are doing everything they can to destroy domestic oil and gas production. I think the real question is why is our dipshit hungarian president pursuing inflationary policies like this cap n trade scheme? I for real don’t know why inflation is assumed to redound to the benefit of dirty socialists but they want them some inflations bad bad bad. Maybe it’s all about the one-world currency thing? Mr. Soros would give Baracky a pat on the head and a cookie if he could pull that one off I bet. Two cookies even.
Ed Henry got slammed last night…
don’t take it personal Ed… it’s not your fault you stink as a reporter.
I for real don’t know why inflation is assumed to redound to the benefit of dirty socialists but they want them some inflations bad bad bad.
“Most importantly, expansion of the money stock itself levies a “tax”
on holders of money. By issuing fresh batches of money, the federal government can obtain real resources in exchange. An inflationary finance policy is an effective means for the federal government to enlarge its command of the real resources of its citizens, a means all the more effective because its burdens are disguised in the form of rising prices.”
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa008.html
To make this clear, consider the following example. The government wants to command an additional 10% of a period’s GNP, for instance, but it does not want to levy a visible increase in taxes.
Oh sorry — that last bit after the link shouldn’t be there.
What ‘er do yer mean,
Negative feedback machine?
Vapour of Water.
================================
That link is complicated, but this popped out I think:
I like how Baracky claimed that lower interest rates on mortgages was a form of a tax break.
That’s revealing.
Yes. You’ll hear about how they’re only doing this to stop deflation, but if the goal is stealth wealth transfer, there’s little reason for them not to welcome inflation. Certain people will get hurt, but some of those they don’t care about, and they can ameliorate the effects for those they do care about. Welfare reform, for example.
“Reached at her office in New York, DiPerna said President Obama, who in 2000 was a candidate for Congress, was involved as a director of the foundation and voted on the proposal but declined to detail that involvement other than that “he read the proposal and voted on the grant.—
They don’t say which way he voted. MSM MUST BE HIDING SOMETHING.