[Moonman62]

In fact, in a survey of about 40 prominent economists from across the profession, 90% agreed with this statement: “A tax on the carbon content of fuels would be a less expensive way to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions than would a collection of policies such as ‘corporate average fuel economy’ requirements for automobiles.”[1] When weighted by the level confidence the respondents had in their answers, the agreement rose to 95%.

What a misleading title by the source. I was getting ready to bad mouth economists, then I saw that they were forced to choose the lesser of two evils.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Why not tax liberal flatulence...

[DeprogramLiberalism]

Good observation. Nowhere in the column does the author provide evidence to support the headline. All he does is provide surveys of economists that say that a carbon tax would be less harmful than raising other taxes. Not the same as a “Pro-Growth Plan”.