API's love/hate relationship with the Congressional Budget Office

The American Petroleum Institute put out a release today criticizing the Congressional Budget Offices calculations for the costs of the Waxman-Markey bill:
The calculations give new meaning to the term ‘rosy scenario,” according to the statement from President Jack Gerard, noting the annual household cost estimate of $175 per household doesn’t jibe with the estimate that gasoline could rise 77 cents a gallon, or $800 more a year assuming a family uses 20 gallons a week.

“Proponents of Waxman-Markey want you to believe cap-and-trade isn’t going to cost more than taking a few people to Disney World for a day. No amount of econometric sleight-of-hand can make that true.”

But earlier this month, APIs assessment of a CBO estimate of the bill was a bit more complimentary of the CBO’s broader numbers:

“The study confirms the bill discriminates against ordinary Americans who depend on cars, trucks, trains and airplanes and will be massively costly. The $846 billion price tag on emission allowances – borne disproportionately by oil consumers – will drive up costs of producing and refining gasoline, diesel and other fuel products while doing nothing to protect fuel consumers, including American families, trucking, the airlines, the construction industry and many other businesses that rely on oil to make or transport products.”

Expect more heated debate up through an expected vote in the House this Friday. The National Center for Policy Analysis is calling it “Perhaps the most destructive legislation in our country’s history …” The Pew Center (which supports the bill) has its response to “myths” about the bill. The wind energy business wants you to support the renewable power requirements in the bill… The National Center for Public Policy Research says African-Americans are opposed to the bill, and Friends of the Earth says this is a polluter-backed bill.
Here’s a TV ad for the bill:
And here’s one against it…