,,iii  #aacth ,,congress  #ast ,session 
,s4 ,,con4 ,,res4 #d  ,,in ,,the        
,,senate ,,of ,,the ,,united ,,states   
,january #bh1 #bjac ,mr4 ,vitter 7for   
himself1 ,mr4 ,cochran1 ,mr4 ,blunt1    
,mr4 ,lee1 ,mr4 ,moran1 ,mr4            
,mc,connell1 ,mr4 ,johnson of           
,wisconsin1 ,mr4 ,barrasso1 ,mr4        
,inhofe1 ,mr4 ,coburn1 ,mr4 ,cornyn1    
,mr4 ,wicker1 ,mr4 ,boozman1 ,mr4       
,risch1 ,mr4 ,roberts1 ,mr4 ,heller1    
,mr4 ,enzi1 and ,mr4 ,johanns7 submitted
 the following concurrent resolution2   
which was referred to the ,committee on 
,finance  ,,concurrent ,,resolution     
,expressing the sense of ,congress that 
a carbon tax is not in the economic     
interest of the ,united ,states4        
,whereas a carbon tax is regressive in  
nature and would unfairly burden those  
vulnerable individuals and families in  
the ,united ,states that are already    
struggling under a stagnating economy2  
,whereas a carbon tax would increase the
 cost of every good manufactured in the 

,united ,states2 ,whereas a carbon tax  
would harm the entire ,united ,states   
manufacturing sector2 ,whereas the      
increase in production of domestic      
energy resources on private and         
,state-owned land has created           
significant job growth and private      
capital investment2 and ,whereas        
affordable and reliable energy sources  
are critical to maintaining the ,united 
,states global competitiveness3 ,now1   
therefore1 be it  ,that it is the sense 
of ,congress that a carbon tax would be 
detrimental to ,american families and   
businesses1 and is not in the interest  
of the ,united ,states4