Sign up for our daily briefing

Make your busy days simpler with Axios AM/PM. Catch up on what's new and why it matters in just 5 minutes.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on the day's biggest business stories

Subscribe to Axios Closer for insights into the day’s business news and trends and why they matter

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Stay on top of the latest market trends

Subscribe to Axios Markets for the latest market trends and economic insights. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Sports news worthy of your time

Binge on the stats and stories that drive the sports world with Axios Sports. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tech news worthy of your time

Get our smart take on technology from the Valley and D.C. with Axios Login. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Get the inside stories

Get an insider's guide to the new White House with Axios Sneak Peek. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Axios on your phone

Get breaking news and scoops on the go with the Axios app.

Download for free.

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Denver news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Des Moines news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Twin Cities news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Twin Cities

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Tampa Bay news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa Bay

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Want a daily digest of the top Charlotte news?

Get a daily digest of the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Charlotte

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Sign up for Axios NW Arkansas

Stay up-to-date on the most important and interesting stories affecting NW Arkansas, authored by local reporters

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios

New lobbying urging Congress to support a price on carbon emissions is not convincing lawmakers to warm up to the policy.

Why it matters: A carbon price is widely considered one of the most economically efficient ways to tackle climate change. But, economics be damned, its politics remain deeply unpopular.

Where it stands: Despite renewed agreement that climate change is a problem the government should address, Democrats and Republicans are talking past each other on policy. That’s troubling for those who want action, because bipartisan support is almost always essential for big legislation.

  • House Democrats recently introduced legislation that relies on mandates that could put an indirect — and thus less efficient — price on CO2. “We don’t have an explicit carbon price because we don’t think we need it,” House Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone said recently.
  • After a decade of mostly dismissing climate change, Republicans have begun to engage on policies, but House GOP leadership is pushing far narrower policies.
  • Discarded in that shuffle is what economists, business executives and most energy experts agree is the most necessary (if not solely sufficient) tool to tackle climate change: putting a direct price on the climate impact of oil, natural gas and coal through a tax on the carbon dioxide they emit.

This dismissal is occurring despite a growing list of deep-pocketed and influential interests saying they want Congress to pass precisely that policy.

  • The Climate Leadership Council, a coalition founded three years ago, and a related lobbying effort launched in 2018 are pushing a carbon price whose funds go back to Americans via dividend checks. Numerous corporations, including big oil companies, are supportive, as are former top Republican leaders and environmental groups.
  • The CEO Climate Dialogue, which launched last spring, is a similarly broad-based coalition pushing a campaign for a less prescriptive carbon price.

Yes, but: It’s still early days for these efforts. Lobbying behind the scenes could produce a sea change not publicly evident today, either imminently or years down the line.

  • “We think it’s likely our plan will be introduced in both chambers on a bipartisan basis by mid-year,” said Ted Halstead, CEO of the Climate Leadership Council.

Flashback: Similar legislation has already been introduced in the House, and that by itself does not indicate enough members from both parties will back it. Past precedent is also unfavorable to the policy.

  • In the span of six months in 1993, Bill Clinton proposed — and then largely retracted — what amounted to the closest thing to a carbon tax a U.S. president has pursued.
  • Neither Barack Obama nor 2016’s Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, embraced a carbon tax.
  • A core problem is that it’s regressive — the tax disproportionately affects low-income people — though current proposals attempt to counteract that, like the dividend which helps poorer families the most.

The intrigue: The subtle evolution of one moderate House Republican — Rep. Tom Reed of New York — illustrates today’s persistently cool reception.

  • When I interviewed him last summer, he said flat out he “doesn’t support a carbon tax” but that a carbon dividend is “more intriguing” to him.
  • Fast forward to last month. He told me he has become less optimistic about its prospects and his potential support for it because of long-standing concerns about the money not actually ending up back in Americans’ pockets.
  • “There are stakeholders who are quietly saying that they love this idea, they would get it into law and then they have a strategy to kill the dividend and put it into the general coffers,” Reed said. “People are salivating to get access to that revenue, and that carries a lot of sway with me.”
  • What to do with the money raised is a perennial debate.

A more fundamental dynamic is at play with Republicans.

  • Backers of a carbon price argue that such a policy is inevitable. They believe it’s just a matter of time until at least a few Republicans embrace it, and most Democrats accept it despite wanting something more aggressive, and enough lawmakers get it over the finish line.
  • That scenario ignores one possibility: that Republicans don’t ever embrace it and instead indefinitely push their renewed focus on innovation, which was also the climate agenda of America’s last Republican president, George W. Bush.
“There is a risk that the innovation agenda is inadequate to address climate change but adequate to address the political pressure on Republicans. That is a risk today. But the forecast for the impacts of climate change is so severe I believe that pressure to address the reality of the situation will make the current proposals clearly insufficient in time.”
— Alex Flint, executive director, Alliance for Market Solutions

What’s next: Expect more support to emerge off of Capitol Hill soon. Halstead says his group is announcing new members this month.

The bottom line: On the Hill, a carbon price appears to be on the path it has always been on — a road to nowhere.

Go deeper

Former Blizzard CEO says he "failed” women at the studio

Image: Neville Elder / Getty Images

Mike Morhaime, who co-founded and worked at video game studio Blizzard for 28 years, has apologized publicly for toxic work conditions at his former studio, which is now the subject of a discrimination and harassment lawsuit by the state of California.

Why it matters: Morhaime is no longer at Blizzard, but was its leader for most of its existence and therefore was in charge when much of what is alleged in California’s suit would have occurred.

Updated 3 hours ago - Sports

Olympics dashboard

🚨: Heat wave brings scorching temperatures to Tokyo Olympics

📺: The Olympic events to watch today

🤸🏾‍: Athlete spotlight — When to watch Simone Biles, the G.O.A.T

🇺🇸: Jill Biden cheers on Team USA at Tokyo Olympics

🥇: The post-Phelps Games

👻: Behind the scenes at the COVID Olympics

💉 Exclusive poll: America's divided over the COVID Olympics

Go deeper: Full Axios coverage

4 hours ago - Sports

NFL to fine unvaccinated players $14K for violating COVID-19 protocols

Patrick Mahomes of the Kansas City Chiefs wears a facemask while preparing for the start of Super Bowl LV. Photo: Patrick Smith/Getty Images

The NFL will fine unvaccinated players $14,650 if they violate COVID-19 protocols this season, ESPN reports.

The big picture: The rule change comes two days after the NFL announced that postponed games due to coronavirus outbreaks among unvaccinated players or staffers will not be rescheduled and teams responsible for delays will automatically forfeit.