Clean-energy bill draws reasoned support, less-reasoned criticism
Following introduction of the legislation Wednesday, a diverse group of environmentalists—including representatives from a veteran’s organization, Aspen Skiing Company and sportsman and water conservations groups—held a media call in support of the bill.
The group ran through a number of solid reasons to support the bill: economic (according to a Center for American Progress study, Colorado could gain $2.6 billion in investment and 28,000 jobs from the bill), national security: (we need to stop sending billions of dollars to hostile foreign regimes), global warming (which, according to a report put out earlier this year by 13 federal agencies, has already raised average temperatures in the Southwest by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit), water (global warming could melt the Colorado snowpack up to 60 days earlier each season) and impacts on hunting and fishing (which contribute 1.8 billon dollars a year to Colorado’s economy).
Colorado Sen. Mark Udall also released a statement, citing three predictable-but-solid reasons for clean energy legislation: making America less dependent on foreign oil, creating jobs in the recession and leaving the planet in better shape for our children. (Sorry folks, the best reasons aren’t always the most exciting ones.)
Meanwhile, conservative Colorado Springs blogger Michelle Malkin railed against “expensive eco-hysterics,” with scintillating, but dramatically less compelling reasons: 1) the bill still has “placeholders” where details are being worked out, and 2) raising efficiency standards for plane engines will force private and military institutions to buy them from G.E. (because no other manufacturer can make more efficient engines?)
The complaint follows a Malkin post from last week titled “Beware the Climate Change Republicans,” in which Malkin lists the vulnerable Republicans most likely to be wooed to the dark side of energy reform.
As they prepare for their bill introduction, Boxer and Kerry are most likely looking for help from Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who currently is in the thick of the health care debate. Down the line, the Democrats are also hopeful they can satisfy other longtime climate advocates, including Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Richard Lugar of Indiana.
Colorado State Senator Scott Renfroe, a Republican representing the 13th District, didn’t wait for the new climate bill to come out: Days earlier, he signed a letter written by Grover Norquist, president of anti-tax lobbying group Americans for Tax Reform. The letter urged Senators Boxer and Kerry not to introduce their “energy tax.” Citing no studies or sources, Norquist insisted the legislation would raise the cost of energy “thousands of dollars each year on every American family” and thus “crush the economy.”
Got a tip? Freelance story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.
Like this story? Steal it! Feel free to republish it in part or in full, just please give credit to The Colorado Independent and add a link to the original.
News Literacy Project event: Concerned about online misinformation? The lack of news literacy? You can make a difference by participating in this free workshop! After […]Read More
Cash dropped so far in Colorado’s governor race blows away 2010 and 2014 spending records – combined
With one week to go until the primary, spending in Colorado’s 2018 governor’s race has shattered records – even for spending in general elections in […]Read More