Burgess in the News

Climate-change bill not so popular among North Texas representatives

Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Anna Tinsley, June 26, 2009
Several members of the North Texas congressional delegation plan a fierce fight against the climate change bill scheduled to go before the House today, saying it will hurt the economy.

Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Lewisville, has made it a mission to kill the bill, which for the first time would limit the pollution blamed for global warming.

The bill "is a costly and harmful policy that fails to adequately protect American consumers and could cripple our nation’s economy," Burgess said. It "will increase overhead costs, which would be devastating for business. It will increase energy prices for every single American household by hundreds, maybe thousands, of dollars.

"It is an energy tax that will be imposed on every single American consumer."

Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, whose district includes Johnson and Hood counties, lauds the effort to address global warming but doesn’t know how he’ll vote "until he has reviewed the impact the bill would have on families’ utility bills and gasoline costs."

Republicans such as Burgess and Reps. Kay Granger of Fort Worth and Joe Barton of Arlington are strongly opposed.

Barton, a global-warming skeptic, has fought this plan for months.

The ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee coined a new acronym for the plan: CRAP (continue ruining America’s prosperity).

Barton, who has warned that global-warming legislation could lead to job cuts and higher energy costs, has called this cap-and-trade plan "a scheme devised by radical environmentalists and liberal politicians in Washington to get their big-government hands in your wallet."

Granger sent out an e-newsletter to constituents this week, saying she believes that this bill sets artificial limits on emissions that will force businesses, farmers and others to "severely alter the way they operate."

"If they can’t operate within their emissions limit, they would have to pay the government or other parties to get a higher limit," Granger wrote.

"This is essentially a tax on these groups, and it is most certainly going to be passed on to all of you."


To view the original article click here.