Three more Republican politicians have now used the heavily discredited and factually incorrect $1,761 figure as a per-family per-year price tag for cap and trade legislation, bringing the current total to 12.
- John Cornyn issued a press release saying "According to a the Department of Treasury’s analysis, new taxes would be between $100 and $200 billion each year, costing families up to 1,761 each year." Unlike some of the others, Cornyn didn’t even try to hide his source. He linked directly to the conservative blogger who came up with the $1,761 figure. He attributes the figure to the Treasury Department — which is false.
- According to user casinclair on Twitter, Sarah Palin repeated the lie at her speech in Hong Kong yesterday. I’m assuming this is paraphrased, and am trying to find a full transcript: "Cap and tax (trade) will cause unemployment. Say it will cost $1800 per Americans and cause no change."
- Republican Senate Candidate Scott Brown said yesterday: "They want a "yes" vote on cap and trade, even if it will raise energy costs on the average family in this country by $1,761 a year."
Finally, this is not a new addition to the list, but according to Media Matters, House Minority Leader John Boehner repeated the lie for the third time yesterday:
Responding to President Obama’s climate change speech on September 22, 2009, House Minority Leader John Boehner cited a cap-and-trade cost estimate snatched from documents analyzing a cost-estimate of an out-dated, abandoned cap-and-trade plan that immediately auctioned 100% of carbon allowances.
If you are aware of or come across additional examples of politicians — Republicans or Democrats — repeating some variation of this lie, please let me know.
Here is the full list of 12 Republican politicians who have repeated this lie so far:
- Senator Lamar Alexander issued a press release saying "American families can’t afford a new $1,761 yearly energy tax."
- Senator James Inhofe issued a press release claiming that "the President’s own economic team said his cap-and-trade proposal would cost each family $1,761 per year."
- Senator Lisa Murkowski issued a press release stating that "At the upper end of the administration’s estimate, the cost per American household would be $1,761 a year, on top of what they already pay in taxes to the government."
- 2008 also-ran Mitt Romney told the crowd at the conservative Value Voters Summit on Saturday that the clean energy legislation "would cost the average American family $1,761 a year, the equivalent to a 15% income tax hike."
- Representative Roy Blunt tweeted: "CBS reports the Obama Admin privately concluded cap & trade could cost families $1,761 a year. Same as a 15% personal income tax increase."
- Representative Fred Upton fired off a letter, which cites the $1700 figure, accusing the Treasury Department of censoring information in the FOIA release.
- House Minority Leader John Boehner said on PBS’ NewsHour: "It’s a cap-and-trade proposal that came through the House that we now find out from the Treasury Department would cost each American family over $1,700 per year."
- House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence copied-and-pasted the wholly discredited CBS blog post where the $1,761 figure originated into an email to supporters.
- Update 9/21: Representative Pete Sessions writes "American households could pay an additional $1,761 a year in expenses."
- Update 9/22: John Cornyn issued a press release saying "According to a the Department of Treasury’s analysis, new taxes would be between $100 and $200 billion each year, costing families up to 1,761 each year." Unlike some of the others, Cornyn didn’t even try to hide his source. He linked directly to the conservative blogger who came up with the $1,761 figure. He attributes the figure to the Treasury Department — which is false.
- Update 9/22: According to user casinclair on Twitter, Sarah Palin repeated the lie at her speech in Hong Kong yesterday. I’m assuming this is paraphrased, and am trying to find a full transcript: "Cap and tax (trade) will cause unemployment. Say it will cost $1800 per Americans and cause no change."
- Update 9/22: Republican Senate Candidate Scott Brown said yesterday: "They want a "yes" vote on cap and trade, even if it will raise energy costs on the average family in this country by $1,761 a year."



15 Comments

Palin’s repetition should alone be enough to know it’s a lie. Anything that comes out of her mouth is…
Inhofe repeated it on Washington Journal a couple of days ago.
how did Bible Spice do at her joke appearance in hongkong (entitled “A View America’s Main Street”)?
This whole climate debate internatinally is quite disturbing. The US announces a bunch of insincere noncommitments. The Chinese announce a few half measures and agrees with a wink and a nod not to complain about the fact that the US is still massively subsidizing American oil and gas and coal producers (the Public Option for hydrocarbons!). The US reciprocates by pushing for more of a Chinese voting role on financial reform voting rights, but not by giving up any of our voting rights… but rather by demanding that the Europeans unilaterally give up some of their’s. Greenland keeps on melting.
This is one tough fight.
I have NO idea if any efforts to date are persuading or changing any corporate behaviors.
Alas, there are SO many fights to fight.
Civil and women’s rights still suffer, our constitution is under siege, corporate behavior is eliminating the middle class, world wide.
It’s a big ass battle, it is.
Be a lot simpler to list the instances when pols didn’t lie.
NPR gleefully reports that a new era gold rush is in store for speculators along the melting Northwest Passage. Gotta get there quick. Russia has already planted a flag on the sea floor. NPR sez that Russia is greedy. According to the liberal bastion NPR, Greedy Russia already has most of the oil and mineral wealth in the north. Therefore, Greedy Russia should acquiesce to the white-hat-wearing cowboys – the benevolent US-sponsored multinational corporations.
Fear of global warming or catastrophic global ice melt is evidently for p*ssies.
Just think how valuable that northern real estate will be when most of the globe has been rendered uninhabitable.
“Only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish caught will we realize we cannot eat money.”
~ Cree Indian Proverb
There will be boom towns along every stretch of the waterway. Then, boom towns only where there is sufficient elevation.
G. Dubya Bush’s prognostication will be manifested precisely as he pontificated – “History? Fuck histery. In the future we’ll all be dead”.
unless you live in the Maldives. Reportedly, the parliament of that rapidly sinking country is literally shoppin’ on the open market for some place on higher ground to move their entire population to.
Buy land in northern Canada?
Sorry to tell you, but according to the New York Times, temps are cooler than they have been in years and are predicted to get cooler still over the next 10 years. You chicken little types will have to go back to ” the earth is freezing”. Your “The earth is melting” line is just not panning out.
Did you even bother to read the actual article? The temperatures have temporarily plateaued, principally because the Pacific in in a Las Niñas cooling cycle. The wonder is that there hasn’t been greater cooling. The author, and climatologists involved point out that climate change is not “weather change”. It’s a long-term trend that fluctuates due to local and temporary factors. But the two century old trend is clear.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09…..;html?_r=1
BTW you refer to the snowball earth prediction that also was misinterpreted back in the 1970’s. If you bother to read the original scientific articles they state quite clearly that the Milankovich cycles (based on things like the earths precession, equinoctal tilt, etc.) predicts a cooler climate…but that anthropogenic factors (human produced) might produce deviations from that if the effects were severe enough.
And that’s precisely what happened. We’re warmer, in spite of the Milankovich cycles!!!
What happened to NPR? jesus christ they suck now. i guess all those years of being castigated for alleged “liberal bias” hurt their feelings institutionally and they want to prove they arent cissies…or surviving on donations from the carnegie familly and other arch, trans national capitalists wasnt an entirely good idea after all.
I thought you libs were supposed to be watching out for the little guy. This tax, no matter if it is $1 or $1,761 is going to directly hit the middle class, and even harder the poor. Although I bet your answer to helping the poor will be to tax the rich…again.
BTW, CBS apparently is on board with that figure too. Maybe they are all wrong an this posting is right. Ya that make sense.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2…..4040.shtml