Why the GOP Should Support a Carbon Tax

President Obama's triangulation on cap-and-trade and drilling is designed to pull in conservative support for his energy bill. Rather than letting the president carve off Republicans to back his plan, the GOP should throw in a game-changer of their own by backing a carbon tax.

Recently, former president George W. Bush has been attaching his name to a raft of environmentally friendly platforms.  The Bush Institute hosted a conference on the feasibility of using America’s natural gas resources to help cut down on carbon dioxide emissions.  New plans for the George W. Bush Center hyped their pro-green design.  And the former President has been slated to speak to the American Wind Energy Association’s WINDPOWER 2010 conference.

Meanwhile, President Obama may have spiked cap-and-trade, and become a moderate advocate of “drill, baby, drill.” (It seems the President is strictly keeping to his playbook of being the anti-Bush in all things.)

Given the Obama Administration’s recent maneuvers, now is the time for Republicans to (as politically odd as it may sound) emulate former President Bush and start actively engaging on green issues.  The forthcoming Senate energy bill is a good place to start.

The President’s triangulation on cap-and-trade and drilling is smart politics, designed to make supporting the energy bill more palatable for some Republicans.  Rather than letting the President carve off a few Republicans, now would be a good time for the GOP to throw in a game-changer of our own by announcing support for a carbon tax, offset by reductions in the payroll tax.

Nothing could possibly flummox the left more.

First of all, Republicans would be proposing a tax (damaging the Democratic talking point that the GOP’s economic policy is only tax cuts for the wealthy), but still reducing taxes in the FICA window of a paycheck (keeping some tax cut cred in Main Street).

Second, Republicans would have a simple, credible alternative to the President’s preferred policies besides “No.”  The lack of a well-enunciated, well-propagated GOP alternative hurt the party’s PR machine during the healthcare debate, and enabled the ultimate passage of the bill.  The proposal will also speak volumes on our willingness to actually run the government.

Third, this would help with winning over moderates and independents, who are more receptive to the existence of anthropogenic global warming than the GOP rank-and-file.  Blurring the difference between which party is green and which party is not green will allow the GOP to focus on issues where Democrats are traditionally weaker with independents, such as national security.

Popular concern on the environment may well have waned considerably, but let’s be honest about two things.

1) The energy bill is not dead.

2) We’re going to have unseasonably hot weather again, and we’re going to have economic recovery at some point.  Then, voters will start to turn to green policies once again (especially my generation, which has always kept a special place in our hearts for the environment); and it would be nice for the GOP to have a strong record on being green.

So, to conclude, let’s emulate Lindsey Graham and George W. Bush a bit more.  It's good for the country, it's good for the planet, and good for us politically.  A rare trifecta, indeed.