Posted on 02/09/2016 4:55:03 AM PST by Kaslin
resident Obama is planning $300 billion in infrastructure and other green energy-related projects over the next ten years, which is part of a string of last minute budget requests that have zero chance of passing Congress. The president's plan to pay for it all: a $10-a-barrel oil tax (via Politico):
The biggest chunk of Obama's proposed new spending, about $20 billion a year—roughly equivalent to the EPA and Interior Department budgets combined—would go to “enhanced transportation options," especially alternatives to driving and flying. That would include subways, buses, light rail, freight rail modernization projects, and a major expansion of the high-speed rail initiative that Obama launched in his 2009 stimulus bill. It would also include a 150 percent increase for a more popular stimulus program known as TIGER, which provides competitive grants for multi-modal transportation projects with measurable economic and environmental benefits.
Obama's plan will also include about $10 billion a year to encourage local, regional and state governments to plan and build smarter infrastructure projects, including incentives to reduce carbon emissions through land-use planning, public transit, electric-vehicle charging, and other strategies. There would be a Climate Smart Fund to reward states that make greener choices with existing federal dollars, as well as competitive grant programs to promote region-wide planning, more livable cities, and infrastructure projects with greater resilience to climate impacts.
Finally, Obama will call for more than $2 billion in annual investments in clean transportation research and development, including efforts to deploy self-driving cars, charging stations for electric vehicles, greener airplanes, and other climate-friendly technologies.
As with most policies emanating from this administration, it won't nearly be enough to ameliorate America's infrastructure woes (via Wired):
The new law "falls far short of the level needed to improve conditions and meet the nation’s mobility needs and fails to deliver a sustainable, long-term source of revenue," according to Trip, a private nonprofit research think tank. Last year, Trip found that clearing the epic backlog of repairs to roads, highways, and bridges would cost $740 billion. Even Obama's relatively aggressive proposal doesn't get there. According to The Washington Post, once the tax is fully phased in, it will generate about $65 billion annually—but not all of that is going toward infrastructure repair. And even if it were, we're looking at more than a decade just to fix the stuff that's broken now.
And it could screw Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail:
…[B]y raising the specter of new taxes on fossil fuels, it could create a political quandary for Democrats. The fee could add as much as 25 cents a gallon to the cost of gasoline, and even with petroleum prices at historic lows, the proposal could be particularly awkward for Hillary Clinton, who has embraced most of Obama's policies but has also vowed to oppose any tax hikes on families earning less than $250,000 a year.
Hillary's proposed agenda for America is projected to cost us $1 trillion in new spending. The promise of tax hikes not being impacting families who make less than $250k is also a long lost promise; Obama included a cigarette tax to pay for State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Also, there's the Obamacare tax slapped on those who remain uninsured under the new Affordable Care Act. More Americans are remaining uninsured since paying that tax is often cheaper than paying the premiums for the plans under Obamacare. Oh, and premiums are set to spike just before Election Day.
Infrastructure is part of the economy; it's in bad shape. The president has a plan, albeit a bad one, to fix it-and you can bet that the press will be asking her if she would undertake a gas tax to pay for such projects if she's elected come November. Additionally, does she support the president's dead on arrival tax hike?
Yes, this policy could spur debate, which seems to be the intention, but it could also allow voters (and the media) to ask her about how she would pay for her own infrastructure agenda as well. Yet, given the hollow promises of no tax increase for the middle class made by Democrats, you can bet that Clinton will duck, dive, dip, and dodge on this gas tax question to further avoid alienating voters. Either way, it could end up being a pickle for her, as she would have to defend a tax and spend policy that usually doesn't turn out well for Democrats. Not to mention, detrimentally impact millions the home budgets of millions of hard working Americans who will have to eat the tax.
Speaker Paul Ryan was quite adamant that this proposal is a non-starter.
"Once again, the president expects hardworking consumers to pay for his out of touch climate agenda. A $10 tax for every barrel of oil produced would raise energy prices—hurting poor Americans the most. This announcement, the latest in a series of regulatory attacks on the energy sector, proves President Obama is still on a mission to destroy a major backbone of the U.S. economy. The president should be proposing policies to grow our economy instead of sacrificing it to appease progressive climate activists. The good news is this plan is little more than an election-year distraction. As this lame-duck president knows, it's dead on arrival in Congress, because House Republicans are committed to affordable American energy and a strong U.S. economy."
Correct tense, given this idiotic tax won't happen, period.
Thankfully 0 won't be around much longer...
SSDD.
The White Mosque will send it to terrorists
and the GOP will do nothing — except support it
and pretend they did not.
Tax to the max the Theocracies that want to sell their oil here.
Next 10 years ??
That AH is out in less than a year.
What an arrogant $%%#@
Maybe this is one of those things that is designed for Hillary to come out against it. That would make her look less socialist than Bernie who would probably say, “why stop at 19 a barrel,”
The tax will be frittered away on pie-in-the-sky projects that nobody wants like high-speed rail and electric cars. In the mean time airports and roads and bridges will continue to decay.
We need to artificially raise prices because heating your home and driving aren’t expensive enough.
He’s just making a political statement. He hates being a lame duck.
Pardon me, but if I remember correctly, the President does NOT have power to levy taxes.
Isn’t that up to our Congress???
It’s not a problem. The legislation will be coupled with a “Black Drivers Matter” rebate which will give favored citizens (and non-citizens) a 25 cent a gallon affirmative transportation rebate.
Equal protection under the law—fuggedaboutit!
It is according to the Constitution, but, the Constitution, as written, is long gone. Now all it means is that the unborn and partially born can be slaughtered and their remains sold and used in various other things, criminals enjoy Government protection while the innocent get Government prosecution and persecution. Tow homosexuals have the “right” to “marry” each other. For starters.
it won’t help, but it will hurt twice as bad when gas prices go up again after the election....adding to the impetus to buy ‘green’ cars.
I thought we fixed the infrastructure when we spent billions on “Shovel Ready Projects”.
I don't know, with McConnell and Ryan...
Obana’s dream of “necessarily skyrocketing costs of energy” got thwarted by a little reality - now he needs to double down in his attempts to turn what’s left of the middle class into welfare parasites by nickel and diming them to death.
He meant the infrastructure of the democrat party.
No doubt the afrostructure too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.