In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels disclaims intention to run for office again (yes, but people change their minds all the time) and writes an inspired column opposing cap-and-trade. He puts the whole boondoggle in stark terms:

Quite simply, it looks like imperialism. This bill would impose enormous taxes and restrictions on free commerce by wealthy but faltering powers — California, Massachusetts and New York — seeking to exploit politically weaker colonies in order to prop up their own decaying economies. Because proceeds from their new taxes, levied mostly on us, will be spent on their social programs while negatively impacting our economy, we Hoosiers decline to submit meekly.

[. . .]

And for what? No honest estimate pretends to suggest that a U.S. cap-and-trade regime will move the world’s thermometer by so much as a tenth of a degree a half century from now. My fellow citizens are being ordered to accept impoverishment for a policy that won’t save a single polar bear.

We are told that although China, India and others show no signs of joining in this dismal process, we will eventually induce their participation by “setting an example.” Watching the impending indigence of the Midwest, and the flow of jobs from our shores to theirs, our friends in Asia and the Third World are far more likely to choose any other path but ours.

And that explains precisely why the president and Congressional leadership are having a tough time rounding up the votes. Aside from conservatives who object in principle to government’s micro-management of the economy, the impact on Middle America is real and a vote for “imperial climate-change policy” is likely to be a dangerous one for lawmakers from Indiana and surrounding states.