Senator Dorgan Would Like To Replace Cap And Trade With Cap And Dividend

So what’s the difference? Carbon emitters (read: everyone) wouldn’t be able to trade carbon credits with one another. Those exceeding their government-instituted caps would be penalized with a tax on their emissions instead, with the proceeds of that tax being redistributed to the people. Or, more likely, kept by the federal government to fund more spending.
In Dorgan’s own words:

Dorgan, a senior member on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said Tuesday that he opposes the cap-and-trade provision in the House bill.
“The trade piece of cap-and-trade will have investment banks creating carbon securities,” Dorgan said. “Once again, we’ll be back in a marketplace of speculation.”
He said that could lead to similar situations like last summer, when speculators drove the cost of oil to more than $140 per barrel.
Instead, Dorgan said he would support a “cap-and-dividend” policy, which would “reasonably” limit carbon emissions based on available technology, and then charge a fee to emitters who don’t follow the restrictions. The money would be given to the public, he said.

Oh those evil speculators who drive up the cost of everything! Of course, Dorgan’s proposed version carbon cap and tax would make everything more expensive too. But I guess it’s ok when the government does it.
My problem with this is who it is, exactly, that gets to define what a “reasonable” limit on carbon emissions is. Obviously, the government is going to come up with some calculation for that but how do we know what they’re motivated by? How do we know they aren’t playing favorites from industry to industry? How do we know that they can even calculate what a “reasonable” carbon emission rate is? We don’t, and there are certainly no angels in government we can trust with this sort of responsibility.
But what Dorgan is really angling at here is control, which is what his “cap and dividend” and “cap and trade” are really all about at the end of the day. Keep in mind that we can’t do anything without emitting carbon. You can’t manufacture widgets in a factory without emitting carbon. You can’t sell widgets on the internet without emitting carbon. You can’t deliver widgets to people’s homes without emitting carbon. Heck, you can’t even lay on the couch and take a nap without emitting carbon.
So if the government controls carbon emissions, they control everything. That’s the endgame. Government control of everything.
I doubt that Dorgan’s redistributory dream of a “cap and dividend” carbon tax will ever be seriously considered. I think he’s more just paying it lip service so that he, much like his colleague Senator Conrad, have an excuse to vote “no” on the bill.
Probably right after they vote “yes” to giving the bill cloture.