[palmer]

The thrust of the bill "caps carbon pollution and reduces CO2 emissions gradually but steadily, auctions carbon pollution permits to the first sellers of oil, coal and natural gas into the U.S. market, and returns 100% of the auction proceeds electronically each quarter to every American with a valid Social Security number," he said. .... He pointed out that his legislation includes a protection for American industries by rebating costs for exports while imposing tariffs on foreign imports.

All well and good in theory. Global warming is normally a tool for rent seekers to get taxpayer subsidies for luxury electric cars (for example). Global warming is also a tool to send reparations payments to third world thugs who ironically spend the money on private jets. So on its face, Van Hollen's proposal is better than those things that we already do.

The problem is that the political process will result in 400 pages of special favors and politicized tariffs which we will have to pass to see what is in it. Also the warming is currently beneficial (more than detrimental) and there needs to be some recognition that CO2 reduction is a long term goal for a century from now using better electricity generation and other energy solutions yet to be invented. Political actions will only stifle those, although a neutral tax is, in theory, the least political proposal.

[palmer]

...auctions carbon pollution permits...

That really sounds like more of a giveaway to the auctioneers. The original tax and rebate proposal simply had a carbon tax on energy sales with a rebate. The auction sounds like a complication to give it more of a cap and trade flavor and cap and trade is basically a giveaway to Goldman.