It is possible that the so-called "cap and trade" bill will be approved when it comes to a vote in the House of Representatives. If that happens it will be because some lawmakers did not vote in the best interests of their constituents.
Neither U.S. Rep. Alan Mollohan nor Nick Rahall, both D-W.Va., had decided by Thursday how to vote on the bill, according to their staffs. Despite repeated attempts, our reporter was unable to learn whether U.S. Rep. Zack Space, D-Ohio, plans to vote for the measure - though he did so in committee.
Of West Virginia's three representatives, only one, U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., had decided to vote against the bill. U.S. Rep. Charlie Wilson, D-Ohio, also has indicated he is "leaning" against the measure.
We are unable to comprehend why Mollohan, Rahall and Space have not committed themselves to vote against "cap and trade." It will be detrimental to hundreds of thousands of their constituents.
"Cap and trade" is formally known as HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. It is intended to limit emissions of "greenhouse gases." It would force many industries, including coal-fired power plants, to pay huge sums for emissions permits or to adapt their plants. Those costs would be passed on to consumers.Because our states rely heavily - almost exclusively - on electricity from coal-fired power plants, "cap and trade" would cost all of us billions of dollars in higher utility rates. Area families would pay at least hundreds, possibly thousands, of dollars more a year for electricity. The new burden could force some businesses to close their doors.
It has been estimated that the cost of "cap and trade" to consumers would be about $646 billion during a 10-year period - though it could be much more. That cost would be borne almost entirely by West Virginians, Ohioans and others where coal is a primary fuel.
Initially, "cap and trade" emissions permits were to be auctioned off. But the bill has been amended so that only 15 percent of permits would be auctioned. The remaining 85 percent would be dealt out by the government - which has an obvious anti-coal bias. Beyond any doubt, politics would be part of the process of handing out permits.
It has been suggested that party discipline is a factor for some Democrat lawmakers attempting to decide how to vote on "cap and trade." Their party's leaders can hand out favors to representatives who go along with them - and can punish those who do not.
But members of Congress are in Washington to serve the people of their states - not their party leaders. If Mollohan, Rahall and Space mean to serve their constituents, they should make their opposition to "cap and trade" known - and should vote against the bill.