Free Markets, Free People

So What Could Cap-and-Trade Eventually Bring?

Well if the UK is any example, “green jackets”, a sort of environmental police force with the power to enter and search (with a blanket “warrant”) any company it so chooses to inspect. Is “Gestapo-like” tactics a stretch?

The boys in green are coming as the Environment Agency sets up a squad to police companies generating excessive CO2 emissions.

The agency is creating a unit of about 50 auditors and inspectors, complete with warrant cards and the power to search company premises to enforce the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), which comes into effect next year.

Decked out in green jackets, the enforcers will be able to demand access to company property, view power meters, call up electricity and gas bills and examine carbon-trading records for an estimated 6,000 British businesses. Ed Mitchell, head of business performance and regulation at the Environment Agency, said the squad would help to bring emissions under control. “Climate change and CO2 are the world’s biggest issues right now. The Carbon Reduction Commitment is one of the ways in which Britain is responding.”

The formation of the green police overcomes a psychological hurdle in the battle against climate change. Ministers have long recognised the need to have new categories of taxes and criminal offences for CO2 emissions, but fear a repetition of the fuel tax protests in 2000 when lorry drivers blockaded refineries.

Criminal offenses for “CO2 emissions” – Orwell saw this coming but clearly he didn’t understand that it would be based in criminalizing a natural byproduct of respiration and trace atmospheric gas, did he?

Again, it’s the precedent this sets which is both upsetting and dangerous. Probable cause? Green Jackets don’t need no probable cause!

Let freedom ring.

~McQ

8 Responses to So What Could Cap-and-Trade Eventually Bring?

  • RE: Warrant cards

    “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEACHED, AND THE PERSONS OR THINGS TO BE SEIZED.” [emphasis mine - dj505]

    For the benefit of our lefty readers, the above text is called “the Fourth Amendment” from an ancient (though still “living”!) document called “The Constitution”, in particular the section called “The Bill of Rights”. When written, this document was intended to establish how the United States government was to be structured and especially what powers and authority is was allowed to have. While I make no claims to be intimately familiar with the entire text of the Constitution, I’m pretty sure that there is no allowance for “blanket searches”.

    In all fairness, though, the “greenjackets” sound rather like OSHA inspectors, only they are looking for different things.

    • Well, it’s not unreasonable to assume you’re emitting CO2 right now, so the 4th amendment doesn’t apply. Besides, do you really think any individual is more important than THE FUTURE OF THE ENTIRE PLANET?
      What’s relly great (from Obama’s socialist perspective) is that they’re not investigating companies based on the actual amount of CO2 that they emit, but purely upon their electric bills. This way they can choose ANY company to investigate and punish, no matter what line of business they’re in. Just give them a list of campaign contributors and let the inspectors be on their way!

      • Yeah, I know. However, the potential for abuse lies with almost ANY department of government, especially the FBI and IRS.

        Don’t get me wrong: I’m not happy with the idea of ANY government body having the authority to snoop around my home or place of work. I accept it to some degree as I see the need to have and enforce certain laws and regulations, such as occupational health and safety. I trust (hope?) that the courts protect us from abuses of power.

  • Green jackets, brown jackets…same difference.

  • What will CRAP AND TRADE bring? Ruin on the economy, massive unemployment, and energy bills for the American consumer up the wazoo.

    It is pure socialist garbage like this which is the chief reason that The Clown™ is becoming more and more unpopular with the American people. His JARs are now at neutral, via Rasmussen:

    “Overall, 53% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President’s performance so far. Forty-six percent (46%) disapprove.”

    This is what The Clown™ got in the election. It took him less than 6 months to lose all his popularity amongst those who didn’t vote for him. From here on out, those who turn against him are his own voters. They want to work and eat like the rest of us, and The Clown™ and his hilarious economic policies will drive them away, too.

    • Q: What do you call the man who legally occupies the Oval Office but has a 1% approval rating?

      A: Mr. President.

      Yes, low approval numbers make it harder for a president to push his agenda, but with control of the White House, Congress and MiniTru in the hands of rabidly ideological partisans, it certainly isn’t impossible. The dems sense a historic opportunity to get every item on the wish list they’ve had for years, and they’re going to do everything they can to push it through. Do you think TAO, SanFran Nan, and many other democrats really care about approval ratings? Even if the GOP takes back control of Congress in ’10 and the White House in ’12, do you really think they will completely dismantle all the things the democrats have done?

  • “Even if the GOP takes back control of Congress in ‘10 and the White House in ‘12, do you really think they will completely dismantle all the things the democrats have done”

    Tell you what, if that does happen they better undo that stuff or they’ll be turned out in short order. If they win back, I have a feeling that will actually be their mandate.

    • I wish I could agree, but the GOP’s track record is pretty lousy. For example, Depression-era programs are still with us despite periods when the GOP controlled the White House and the Congress. Ditto Great Society programs and crap that Jimmuh came up with (WTF do we need a Dept. of Education for, anyway???).

      The GOP is NOT about significantly reducing government. Quite aside from the fact that “Vote for us and we’ll take stuff away from you!” is not exactly a winning campaign slogan, federal programs mean (A) pork and (B) power. The politician who will vote against those things is a rara avis, indeed.

      The only way we’ll be rid of all the government programs that a succession of presidents and Congresses have stuck us with is either national bankruptcy or national dissolution. Unless and until one of these things happens, we’re going to go the way of western Europe: making the occasional stab at reigning in costs, but fundamentally continuing on the death spiral of letting politicians legalize an increasing number of deadbeats robbing a decreasing number of productive citizens.