Wall Street Journal - Ending Energy Subsidies
Op-Ed
Letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal from Congressman Mike Pompeo, as printed on March 16, 2012:
By Congressman Mike Pompeo
Your editorial praises my proposal, the Energy Freedom and Economic Prosperity Act (EFEPA-HR 3308), to eliminate all energy tax credits from the tax code and turn that savings toward lowering the corporate tax rate. I appreciate the vote of confidence when the nation's flagship editorial page argues that mainstream conservatives should oppose energy subsidies, not embrace them.
Providing carve-outs, earmarks and subsidies used to be the norm in Washington. However, conservatives elected in 2010 understand that Congress can no longer afford to dole out tax dollars to prop up failing energy companies. Special interests ranging from solar to wind, propane to biodiesel and natural gas to algae continue to clamor for taxpayer support. But conservatives have learned to say no.
For example, less than a week after your editorial ran, a majority of Senate Republicans voted in favor of EFEPA, which Sen. Jim DeMint introduced as an amendment to the transportation bill. In addition, the Senate voted down two other amendments that sought to extend and create additional energy subsidies. One would have extended numerous expired and expiring energy subsidies, including the wind production tax credit. The other would have enacted the Nat Gas Act and used taxpayer handouts to fund natural-gas infrastructure and subsidize the purchase and production of natural-gas vehicles. Both of these deserved to lose.
Natural-gas-powered vehicles are coming along even without subsidies. Companies like Chesapeake Energy and GE are developing infrastructure on the open market. And as T. Boone Pickens conceded recently on this page, the conversion of heavy trucks from gasoline to diesel only took six years in the 1970s without government intervention. A similar conversion to natural gas can occur without subsidies today.
Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.)
Source