Carbon Taxes and the SPP


Many among our more sovereignty-oriented citizenry are up in arms about the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) and, as I understand it, the non-governmental North American Forum, for reasons completely unrelated to the climate and carbon agendas. (Judicial Watch has helpfully employed the Freedom of Information Act for those of you so interested.)

So, how nice of these groups to hand them more to worry about: see, e.g., the margin notes to the Rapporteur Notes citing “EU as model?” on 4 of 34; there is a focus on liberalization and elimination of monopolies, as well as the delights of “regulatory harmonization” – which would be aimed at things like bringing Mexican trucks up to U.S. safety standards, and presumably other matters – are also a discussion point. At least they avoided adding fuel to the fire by saying things like “Success would not only energize the continent; it would inspire the world.” Oh, wait. No they didn’t (Pastor’s punch line. Always leave ‘em laughing, they say).

Worrisome note for those of us fighting to avoid further encroachment of the Kyoto agenda is that the same document (Rapporteur Notes) that references clean technology and carbon sequestration as preferable to selling carbon credits – which only have value when artificial scarcity is imposed – also calls for an integrated North American approach to climate change citing reference to carbon taxes as an option along with clean tech and sequestration (e.g., page 5 of 34).

See here for the Judicial Watch press release, and here and here for more


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review