WASHINGTON   –  U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (MO-08) today submitted comments on the greenhouse gas emissions rule which is open for public comment by the Environmental Protection Agency.

“Without question, this rule places a tremendous regulatory burden on our local employers during a difficult time in our economy.  Compliance with this rule will be costly for them.  Even worse, I see it is a precursor to taxes and fines for American businesses who do not accurately account for their greenhouse gas emissions,” said Emerson.  “Every Southern Missouri business that relies on an oven, product packaging, or a delivery vehicle ought to be concerned about what this rule will demand from them.”

The FY 2010 budget submitted to Congress in April contains an outline for a $646 billion tax based on the measurement of the gases subject to the proposed EPA rule.

“This is a tax every member of our community will have to bear, regardless of age, income, or employment status.  If you switch on the lights in your home or turn the key in your car, you will be bearing the cost of these new taxes.  It sets a dangerous precedent in rural communities where our lives and our economy are energy intensive,” Emerson said.  “This rule from EPA is the first step in the implementation of those new taxes, which is another reason I vigorously oppose it.”

Excerpts from the text of Emerson’s comments to the EPA on the proposed rule follows.  For the full text, please reply by e-mail to Jeffrey Connor.

“While some businesses are already required to report emissions to the EPA, the expansion of this reporting will be used to formulate a policy that will hurt American businesses. The EPA will continue to push for expansion of emissions reporting requirements until it has all the necessary data it needs to form a carbon tax mechanism.  Any efforts to establish such a tax would impose an undue hardship on the nation by increasing overall energy costs.  While this greenhouse gas inventory is only intended to address 10% of businesses in the United States, the program this data is intended to support will result in higher energy costs which will ripple through the entire U.S. economy.”

“Energy producers will be hit especially hard by any mandated measurement of greenhouse gas emissions, as well as the adverse effects of any subsequent action to fine, penalize, punish or tax an American business for the production of energy.  These punitive costs would most certainly be passed along to the customers of energy producers, and they will ultimately strike at the heart of a rural economy that relies on electricity as a major input of production.”

“Clearly, EPA has chosen measurement methods and reporting requirements with an eye towards further regulations.  Repeatedly, the proposed rule states a purpose of collecting data that can be used to “inform future climate policy development and support a range of possible policies and regulations.” (p. 16474).”

“EPA should postpone completion of this rule until Congress has had an opportunity to address the issue of climate-change, including measurement and reporting requirements, in comprehensive legislation.”

“I hope these arguments are reflected in a final rule which lifts the threshold for reporting in order to exempt small and medium-sized businesses, to limit compliance with the rule to a voluntary basis, or both.  Enterprising Americans businesses, particularly in the manufacturing and agricultural sectors of the Southern Missouri economy, should serve as a very good example of why cautious actions by the EPA are necessary to preserve American competitiveness in those same markets and to likewise preserve American jobs during one exceptionally difficult financial chapter in our nation’s long history of innovation and prosperity.”