© 2022 Connecticut Public

FCC Public Inspection Files:
WEDH · WEDN · WEDW · WEDY · WNPR
WPKT · WRLI-FM · WEDW-FM · Public Files Contact
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Available On Air Stations

Can Taxing Pollution Pay For Infrastructure Improvements?

23584050709_2f25289fab_b.jpg
Oregon DOT
/
Creative Commons

Rebuilding America’s infrastructure is an idea lots of politicians embrace. But how to pay for it can be tricky. Now, one Connecticut congressman is suggesting a possible solution: taxing pollution.

It’s called a carbon tax. And Democrat John Larson wants to use it to pay for a $1 trillion infrastructure program he’s pushing in the House.

“I think that anyone who looks at the revenue that a carbon tax can bring in -- and then how you apply that revenue -- can readily see solutions that everybody can get their arms around,” Larson said.  

The idea is this: tax polluters burning oil and gas so they pollute less. Air quality goes up, and money raised gets pumped back into infrastructure.

But if rebuilding roads and bridges is like political catnip, climate change policy can, at least for some, be a bit of a third rail.

“It’s virtually impossible to imagine meaningful climate action occurring without some substantial degree of Republican support,” said Jerry Taylor, with the Niskanen Center, a libertarian think tank.

Speaking at the Brookings Institution following a presentation by Larson, Taylor said he likes the Congressman's proposal. And that among debates in D.C. about tax reform, carbon pricing may, after decades, realize a “window of opportunity” as more congressional Republicans seem amenable to the idea.

“It gets right down to core identity issues,” Taylor said. “Milton Friedman argued if you have a pollution issue, the most efficient way of addressing it, is just to tax pollution. And then let market signals guide individual entrepreneurs and consumers to decide when, where, and how to reduce emissions. Rather than going to regulators.”

Oil giants like Shell, BP, and ExxonMobil have voiced support for a carbon tax. But the idea has been criticized too, for potentially raising the cost of fuel, which could impact low-income Americans more acutely.

Still, amid climate change denial from party leaders like Donald Trump, taxing emissions could be a tough sell in the near future.

“I think in the long haul, I’m fairly optimistic,” Taylor said. “It’s easy to lose sight of how difficult it is to enact major change in Congress. It takes long, constant, steady work.”

Patrick Skahill is a reporter and digital editor at Connecticut Public. Prior to becoming a reporter, he was the founding producer of Connecticut Public Radio's The Colin McEnroe Show, which began in 2009. Patrick's reporting has appeared on NPR's Morning Edition, Here & Now, and All Things Considered. He has also reported for the Marketplace Morning Report. He can be reached by phone at 860-275-7297 or by email: pskahill@ctpublic.org.

Stand up for civility

This news story is funded in large part by Connecticut Public’s Members — listeners, viewers, and readers like you who value fact-based journalism and trustworthy information.

We hope their support inspires you to donate so that we can continue telling stories that inform, educate, and inspire you and your neighbors. As a community-supported public media service, Connecticut Public has relied on donor support for more than 50 years.

Your donation today will allow us to continue this work on your behalf. Give today at any amount and join the 50,000 members who are building a better—and more civil—Connecticut to live, work, and play.

Related Content