SJ Res 26 needs to get a YES vote.

I will use the cotton industry as an example in understanding the ramifications of a NO vote.

An increase in the cost of production in the form of more emmision control costs will drive the cost of the cotton products produced here in the U.S. up. Then the consumer has to pay more for a cotton product produced here which will cause more competition for our cotton industry.

Cotton products produced in other countries and imported to the U.S. will then have a competitive advantage over our industry. In order for our cotton producers to keep competing with foreign producers, a tarrif or subsidy would have to be imposed to "keep the playing field level". The consumer or tax payers will pay that tarrif or subsidy. Thats the way it works.

By doing this we have less dollars in our pocket to spend because now we paid $4.00 for a pair of socks instead of $3.00. There are only so many dollars. Add up all the people who buy socks and multiply that by the $1.00 extra you just paid. Understand that the firgures are not actual figures but monetary examples for the purpose of conveying a fundimental economic theory.

If the extra dollar you just paid is $1.00 less you have to spend, when you add all the dollars up, those are the jobs that you just lost. Every dollar that you cant spend somewhere else is a job. We don't notice the small stuff, but when you add it up, there it is. Now the EPA has more positions to fill, but those positions are not created jobs because the positions are paid for out of your pocket in the form of taxes. Any government position is not a job created, it is a position filled at the expense of taxpayer like you and I.