Cap & Trade arrives in Banning

Cap & Trade arrives in Banning : Electric Rates to Skyrocket


4/12/13 – Starting May 1, Banning’s electric rate payers will face a 12 % increase in their electric utility rates. Just like with Banning’s water utility, it is huge amounts of debt that continue to take their toll on rate payers. In the mid 2000s, previous City Councils loaded up the (then debt free) City with over $ 110 million in new bond  debt – all without the vote of the people (story) .

Another reason for the increase, other than inflation,  is “cap & trade”.



Cap & trade is based on the (highly disputed) claim that human activity emits CO2 gases which cause a warming of the earth’s atmosphere. In order to curb the emissions, politicians have come up with a slick taxation scheme : they issue “carbon credits”, which are essentially “permits” to pollute. These permits are then auctioned off in government auctions, generating new tax revenue. But unlike conventional government permits, cap &  trade “carbon credits” can be transferred and even sold. Carbon credits are intended to trade like a commodity – freely and without restrictions. This invites speculators to purchase credits they don’t even need, only to sell them later for a profit.

General industry, airlines, power companies all have to purchase these credits in order to be allowed to operate. Essentially the government is saying : you can pollute as long as you pay for it. Ultimately – and Banning being the example of the day –  the cap & trade tax is passed on to consumers. Once again, fleecing the public is the name of the game.



OBAMAcaptradeThe cap & trade concept goes back to the beginning of the Obama administration. Back in 2008, Obama promised voters that under his “plan of a cap & trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket “. Well “skyrocket” they did – and Obama certainly kept his promise this time. Please listen to this audio clip :







CCXWhat the New York Stock exchange (NYSE) is to stocks, CCX is to carbon credits. CCX stands for “Chicago Climate Exchange”. Much like a stock exchange, its purpose is to provide a daily market platform for the trading of carbon credits.

It is to be expected that CCX will stand to make unprecedented amounts of money, evidenced by the fact that it just sold for $ 600 million.  Involved in CCX are no other than “inconvenient truther” Al Gore, as well as Wall Street’s most notorious bankster conglomerate, Goldman Sachs.


Relentless global warming promoter Al Gore will make millions on cap & trade climate tax

Relentless global warming promoter Al Gore stands to make millions on cap & trade climate tax

Gore, who always claims to care so much about the environment, raked up a $ 30,000 utility bill for his personal 20-room mansion (source). So much for hypocrisy. Profiting from carbon tax schemes is apparently more important to Gore than reducing his own carbon footprint.

Goldman Sachs, the other player in CCX,  has a history of being  deeply embedded with  the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. The outgoing Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, was an executive at Goldman Sachs. So was his predecessor, Hank Paulson, who brought the American taxpayers the $ 800 billion bailout during the 2008 financial crisis.

The crisis was triggered by subprime mortgages, and it was also Goldman Sachs who profited $ 4 billion from the collapse of subprime paper (source) , only to turn around and have its former executive,  Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, engineer a taxpayer funded bailout, from which Goldman then profited even more.

obama_sachs-goldman Beyond that , Goldman Sachs is one of the shareholders of the (privately owned) Federal Reserve (list of primary owners). Most Americans fail to realize that it is NOT the US Government but a privately owned corporation called the “Federal Reserve” who prints our money and sets interest rates. That is why our dollar bills are labeled “Federal Reserve Notes” and not “ jingyangTreasury Notes”.

To say Goldman is “connected” in Washington would be an understatement : they run Washington and know how to create and profit from any new taxation opportunity that presents itself. Cap & trade is no exception ; even more so, Goldman Sachs has the financial resources to theoretically buy up all carbon credits at auction and corner the ( completely unregulated) market. Just imagine what that would do for your electric rates !


For years we have been told that the planet is warming and it is due to us humans emitting CO2 gases. Anyone questioning the cause of the warming is quickly labeled as a “global warming denier”, much like one would label someone a “holocaust denier”.

It seems  that a debate is not welcome in the “global warming” community. Neither is peer review among scientists, who claim they can no longer get  government funding if they question the underlying science.

So why is it that a public discussion is discouraged ? Has “global warming” become a religion where anyone questioning it is guilty of blasphemy ?  If the science is correct, why are we discouraged from discussing it ? Truth does not fear investigation.

The following documentary questions the supposed causes of “global warming”. It also shows that the scientific consensus on “global warming” that we are made believe to exist, in reality does not exist at all. The video originally aired in the UK in 2007 but has never been shown publicly in the US. While quite lengthy, this is very well worth watching :




As for cap & trade taxation costs, nothing can be done at the City level to curb their impact. However, prior to raising rates,  two areas of expenses should be examined :

A : The utility rates include payments to the city of over $ 2 million per year just to administer the billing and the utility payments. The city should consider hiring a billing contractor for this service.

B: The current electric bond covenants require the city to have a 115 % coverage over debt service, meaning the net revenue of the electric utility must be 15% higher than what is necessary to make bond payments. There is an identical provision in the city’s water bond.

When water rates were increased in 2010, the city intentionally disregarded the requirement of a 115%  coverage and set rates at 100% in order to keep rates down. As a result, water rates increased much less while bond holders still could get paid. However, technically this constituted a bond default, impacting the city’s credit rating, but the bond holders did not take any action.

It should be considered to approach the electric bond in the same fashion as the water bond  in 2010. This could have a significant impact on the upcoming increase.



The upcoming utility rate increases serve as a reality check for every Banning rate payer. Rates will have to go up, but can the impact be softened ? Maybe so, if the city council carefully considers their options .

However, without a doubt and for everyone to see, cap & trade has now arrived in Banning.



If you would like to comment or discuss this – or any other – article,  please visit us on FACEBOOK