Crises seem to be stacking one on top of another in recent days. The U.S. recession was the hot topic until the outbreak of swine flu, which was usurped by the stories of North Korean missile threats, which in turn gave way to videos of Iranian election protests, and now, of course, all attention is drawn to the Governor Sanford’s torrid love affair with an Argentine mistress. No, wait, make that the passing of Michael Jackson. And we are still waiting for the Ark of the Covenant to open.
However, other major issues are unfolding while regular people’s attention is drawn to the eye-grabbing stories.
A major vote in the House of Representatives on energy legislation is scheduled for today that may radically change the American economy. Considering the size of the bill, 1,201 pages, much of the minutiae of the bill's actual details may remain largely unexamined. As many have noted about the legislation and noted previously concerning the stimulus package, various interest groups are aware of relevant sections of the bill that may affect them, but few people can honestly say they have read the entire bill, which seems the modus operandi of Washington.
The crux of the bill, a cap and trade system, essentially taxing industrial carbon output through the sale of carbon credits, is a major reworking of the American economic system, with far reaching consequences in terms of jobs, growth, industry, and productivity, and the prices of almost everything. Caution is warranted especially in light of the precarious financial situation of the country; the CBO recently released numbers indicating the national debt will outgrow the size of the U.S. economy by 2023.
On June 22nd, Most Reverend Howard J. Hubbard of the USCCB and Ken Hackett, President of Catholic Relief Services wrote a joint letter to Congress largely endorsing the legislation, despite remaining “very concerned about the inadequate funding for assisting the poorest people and countries on earth through international adaptation efforts.” They noted the severe impact climate change may be having on the world’s poor and the need to address it.
Their point is well made, and in light of their concerns, all would agree that a national conversation about the bill is needed to fully consider all the issues involved and the possible consequences. To grab an example from recent memory, a more cautious and circumspect approach to the rush to ethanol in recent years may have foreseen the spike in corn prices that was such a burden on the world’s poor. What are the unforeseen consequences of today’s legislation? In 1,201, pages, maybe quite a few. What is needed is a conversation which should occur when America’s attention is not focused on the King of Pop.
In the letter of Bishop Howard and Mr. Hackett they noted that “we are deeply disappointed that the funding resources committed to international adaptation fall fundamentally short of what is needed initially and that additional increases in resources are pushed too far off into the future. We understand that the current allocation reflects compromise and competing political priorities, but Congress cannot leave the most vulnerable people without adequate help needed to protect their lives and dignity. For us, this is not a marginal matter, but rather a matter of moral priority and policy.” In examining any piece of legislation, we have a moral obligation to take an unbiased look how at the measure affects the most vulnerable. Let us hope that occurs.
Paul Ciarcia, Communications Associate
