Voters across the USA and other countries continue to reject carbon taxes, but Democrats keep finding new ways to separate Americans from their money. The Democratic national party platform endorses a carbon tax, while the Republican platform rejects any and all carbon taxes.

Citizens around the world will continue to reject climate policies that cost them personally, either by direct taxation or by undermining the competitiveness of their own economies. The sooner the world’s leaders accept this reality, the sooner we will be able to put new and lasting solutions in place.

But after decades of global conferences, forests of reports, dire television documentaries, celebrity appeals, school-curriculum overhauls and media bludgeoning, voters don’t believe that climate change justifies policies that would raise their cost of living and hurt the economy.

“The proposed carbon tax is a gas tax and a tax on your electric bill. Worse, it increases automatically year after year so the politicians can raise your taxes without ever having to vote,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. “The tax will be hidden in the price of all goods and services. A hidden tax. A permanent tax. An uncontrolled tax that increases without end.”

A total of 13 of Republican members of the climate caucus lost their reelection bids, according to current election results. Seven Republican members of the caucus are retiring at the end of their current terms.

The open-ended Curbelo carbon tax will continue to rise right along with Washington’s unquenchable desire to spend. This is not good policy, and it’s disappointing to see Republican sponsor misguided legislation. Congress rightfully rejected earmark spending nearly a decade ago. Congress should also reject Rep. Curbelo’s carbon tax.

Two parties with two very different policies. On one side, the Democrats supporting a major new energy tax — but won’t talk about it unless they have the presidency and Congress. On the other side, the Republican Party and President Trump firmly opposing efforts to increase the cost of energy through taxes or regulations.

Florida has enjoyed historic growth over the past two years thanks, in part, to policies put in place by the current Congress and administration. But a new energy tax proposal, co-sponsored by Congressman Francis Rooney, goes against the conservative approach that has led to the booming economy.

There is no such thing as a “free-market” carbon tax. Utahans have a proud history of supporting pro-business and small-government policies, of which a carbon tax is neither. Giving more power to Washington bureaucracy and raising our gas and electricity costs is not in our best interest.

The hidden cost — and the central purpose — of a carbon tax is that it uses prices to change the way we assess the range of possibilities before us. Are we better off with a government check in hand, but without the options we would otherwise have had?

In a recent interview with the Washington Examiner, Rooney said Curbelo’s carbon tax bill was not a new tax but should be referred to as an ‘incentive program’, saying it would, “incentivize people to not burn coal, but burn natural gas, and also invest in solar and wind.”… This could not be further from the truth. If this is not a new energy tax, then how is it going to generate $700 billion in revenue over a decade, as its sponsors claim? The carbon tax bill is an energy tax plain and simple and it would immediately raise gas prices and increase the average Americans’ energy costs by $275 by 2020.

2018 Energy touches every aspect of our lives and is critical to our economy, our standard of living, and our very survival. Rep. Curbelo’s carbon tax would increase our energy prices year after year. Floridians don’t want or deserve higher energy costs, and our elected representatives shouldn’t inflict them on us.

How many times have we seen the part of the “deal” that falls on taxpayers stick while the part about government doing something good for us doesn’t? We all care about the environment. We all care about air quality. And we respect those who are prepared to put forward reasonable ideas. But a carbon tax isn’t the solution to anything.

Why Rep. Rooney would support a carbon tax that creates more taxes, more regulations and more government bureaucracy is perplexing to say the least. Rep. Rooney should withdraw his support for the carbon tax legislation and get back to working on policies that will improve the lives of hard working Floridians.

Empowering government to tax more industries by what they produce at the ultimate expense of consumers and our economy should serve as a giant red flag that a carbon tax is neither free-market nor conservative. This is worth pointing out just in case Al Gore’s seal of approval didn’t convince you. Channeling Mr. Gore, Mr. Curbelo claims his legislation will “save the planet,” words you’ll surely have a hard time finding in the collected speeches of Ronald Reagan.

The cost of utilities and gasoline would increase dramatically for all Americans. This is not a flaw of the carbon tax, but rather its explicit intent. Moreover, a carbon tax would have an outsized impact on energy-producing states like Louisiana, devastating the state’s manufacturing base and energy industry.

Republicans have no business backing this kind of anti-consumer, anti-business legislation. Here is a simple question for the Republican supporters of this bill: Why would you willingly inflict bigger government, more taxes and higher energy costs on your constituents? Voters in your districts might well be asking the same question come November 6.

Head David Williams, President of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, on Leland Conway’s morning radio show talking about how the carbon tax bill sponsored by Reps. Carlos Curbelo, Brian Fitzpatrick and Francis Rooney is anything but market-based.

Bad policy should always be openly debated, but bad and ineffective policy should be universally rejected. If a carbon tax can’t halt or even slow rising temperatures, why would we impose such a heavy cost on consumers and the economy?

Rep. Poliquin is right in his opposition to a carbon tax and noted in a letter last month that a carbon tax is regressive and would adversely impact the most vulnerable, including, “the young, the poor, the elderly and those living on fixed incomes.”

A recent bill introduced by Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) and co-sponsored by Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Francis Rooney (R-FL), for instance, would implement a national carbon tax that would raise energy prices for all consumers, as well as increase prices for essential products that we all rely on every day.

A carbon tax is poor public policy and the Curbelo-Fitzpatrick bill would be detrimental to our state. It would increase the cost of most kinds of energy — namely, the kinds that American families, truckers and businesses rely on every day — and would unfairly burden many unrelated industries to pay for our highway system.

A carbon tax, in contrast, is an economic depressant. It is a direct assault on investment and job creation in the mining and energy-intensive manufacturing industries, leeches hundreds of dollars annually out of household budgets, and makes the U.S. economy in general less competitive by increasing production and transportation costs.

Economic realities will likely doom a carbon tax to fail. Economies are complex instruments that always defy central planners, derailing even the best-laid plans. Policymakers must steer clear of this poorly thought out proposal that will achieve little at a gargantuan cost.

This proposal is preposterous as environmental policy regardless of what one assumes about the science and dangers of anthropogenic climate change. But it is serious in terms of wealth redistribution.

The current American energy boom is ushering in a new era of economic opportunity. The U.S. is poised to become a net energy exporter — which means more American jobs, lower energy prices, and more money in families’ pocketbooks. So, I urge Congressman Curbelo to reconsider introducing a new, regressive energy tax and instead focus on policies that would boost our nation’s energy supplies and fix our infrastructure and transportation challenges.