McCain on Global Warming

There was an interesting back and forth yesterday over at the Corner on McCain’s global warming policy. McCain backs a “cap-and-trade” system for carbon emissions rather than a direct tax, and Ramesh Ponnuru writes:

There is a debate between proponents of each approach, but for the most part people who want the federal government to discourage emissions see them as interchangeable, and so do people who oppose any such federal intervention.

Jonathan Adler responds:

Another irony in a so-called reformer like McCain pushing a “cap and trade” program over a carbon tax is that there are reasons to believe that the former is significantly more vulnerable to rent seeking and special interest manipulation.

I have to agree with Adler. This debate between direct taxation and cap-and-trade has had the unexpected effect of putting serious environmentalists on the same side of the issue as more conservative economists. The New York Times reported on this unholy alliance back in November:

“Most economists believe a carbon tax (a tax on the quantity of CO2 emitted when using energy) would be a superior policy alternative to an emissions-trading regime,” write Kenneth P. Green, Steven F. Hayward and Kevin A. Hassett, three economists at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington. “The irony is that there is a broad consensus in favor of a carbon tax everywhere but on Capitol Hill, where the “T” word is anathema.”

There’s no reason to think that McCain position on global warming is anything but sincere. But his commitment to cap-and-trade, which would obscure the cost to consumers and be a windfall for the lobbyists and accountants that can help large corporations rig the system in their favor, makes him out of step on this issue not just with Republicans, but with basic conservative principles.

Related Content