Posted on 07/11/2009 11:02:12 AM PDT by DNME
Thank you for contacting my office regarding H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act. I appreciate your views and having the benefit of your opinion.
On June 26, 2009 the House of Representatives voted to support the clean energy economy and encourage its further development with the passage of the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES). I voted in favor of this historic legislation which promotes the clean energy technologies and resources that will grow outstanding new jobs in our communities and greatly limit our dependence on foreign sources of energy. It also represents a genuine understanding of our critical generational responsibility to address global climate change and mitigate its associated costs.
To reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions, the bill puts in place a market based cap-and-trade system, similar to those which have been used successfully in recent years to limit the effects of acid rain and decrease lead in gasoline. Under the legislation, carbon emissions will be capped at a gradually decreasing total each year, and carbon allowances will be available for purchase through an open market. In effect, the companies that are big polluters will have to pay a charge for polluting, while companies that are energy efficient will be rewarded for having reduced emissions by more than was needed. Thus, those who can easily reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving a reduction of pollution at the lowest possible cost to society. The ability to trade emissions allowances will encourage the development and use of proven alternative sources of energy such as wind, solar, and biofuels that produce limited or no greenhouse gases. This system will reduce carbon emission to levels approximately 83 percent below 2005 levels by the year 2050.
This bill positions our country to lead the clean energy revolution that will create the next generation of research and manufacturing jobs. Estimates from a recent study by UMass Amherst concluded that Massachusetts stands to gain 38,000 jobs and $3.5 billion in investment revenue under the legislation.
The bill also enables our country to draw from existing domestically produced alternative sources to fuel cars and trucks, while greatly reducing our dependence on foreign oil. As these technologies mature and become more affordable, it will be American made clean energy technology and products that are exported around the world and sold overseas.
Other energy efficient provisions in the bill include new standards for building efficiency and new efficiency standards for our appliances. These energy savings are expected to reduce our country's energy use by 5% in 2020 and reduce our carbon pollution by the equivalent of taking 57 million cars off the road for a year.
Opponents of this bill have suggested that it would dramatically escalate potential costs to American consumers. However, this argument was undercut by a recent study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that concluded that the cost per household of the bill comes to around 48 cents a day, and that lower income households would see an average net benefit of $40 annually in their energy bill.
This legislation also takes careful steps not to dislodge or unduly burden any economic sector. The bill gradually reduces emissions, a mere 17% by the year 2020, thus balancing the needs of existing energy companies and domestic industry as they transition to clean fuel production and consumption and is part of the reason why the bill has garnered the support of companies like Duke Energy, Johnson & Johnson and Caterpillar Inc., in addition to environmental advocacy groups.
While opponents have talked about the costs of reform, I have been an outspoken critic of the very significant costs of doing nothing. During consideration of the budget, I spoke on the House floor about the billions of dollars that climate change has arguably already cost through damaged crops and foregone tourism revenue, infrastructure damage, rising water and energy prices, and lost productivity, and the trillions more it could cost us in the future.
As with any large legislative undertaking or change to the status quo, agreement is not universal. But the need to grow our economy, greatly limit our dependence on foreign sources of oil, and finally address global climate change, are areas where we should be able to find common ground. I believe that the American Clean Energy and Security Act takes unprecedented steps to address each of these challenges and I was proud to support its passage.
This bill must now be considered by the Senate. They will undoubtedly make changes to the bill or compile their own and then the House will have to vote again on the compromise between both versions.
Earlier this year, I joined several of my colleagues to form the Sustainable Energy and Environment Coalition. The goal of the coalition is to identify opportunities to inject or improve energy efficiency and renewable energy components so that no opportunity is missed to adopt tangible climate change policy. I will remain focused on these objectives as this bill makes its way through the legislative process and again appreciate having the benefit of your thoughtful views.
Please do not hesitate to contact my office in the future with questions or concerns. If you would like to see what I've been doing in Washington DC, or to get my views on a certain issue, please visit my website at http://tsongas.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Niki Tsongas Member of Congress
In keeping with my congresscritter's example, as she did with the cap and trade bill in question, I haven't read this. Something tells me I already know what it says.
Dear Mikey_1962,
Thank you for contacting me with your views on the American Clean Energy and Security Act. I appreciate your comments and I welcome this opportunity to share my thoughts.
In an effort to pursue solutions to the issue of climate change, Congressman Henry Waxman introduced the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), H.R. 2454, which would limit carbon emissions through a program called “cap-and trade.” This legislation seeks to drastically reform U.S. energy policy and contains a few basic provisions that could adversely affect everyday energy prices. Because this legislation represents such a broad overhaul of our current energy practices, it is important to have a thorough understanding of some of the basic proposals contained in the bill.
First, the bill would limit emissions through a cap-and-trade program, in an effort to decrease the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Specifically, it would set a ceiling on carbon emissions produced by energy providers and other businesses. Those regulated by this law would be issued permits and would be required to hold an equivalent number of credits, or allowances, which represent the right to emit a specified amount of greenhouse gases. The total number of credits in the market would not exceed the cap, effectively limiting total emissions to that designated level. In order for a company to increase its emission allowance, it would be required to buy credits from other entities that pollute less and do not use all of the credits allotted to them.
Another component of ACES is a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES), or a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). A RES mandates that a minimum percentage of energy produced by electricity providers be derived from renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass and geothermal. While I believe we must begin to expand renewable energy production, I feel that this bill, in its current form, does not do enough to address regional concerns brought about by requirements like RPS. As it currently stands, RES requirements favor areas of the country that have plentiful sources of wind and solar energy, putting other regions like the Southeast at a competitive disadvantage.
During the course of negotiations over this bill, I was involved in efforts with my colleagues on the Agriculture Committee to gain several key concessions for farmers and rural America. I am pleased that ultimately financial opportunities were made available to farmers through offsets and carbon sequestration programs, and ultimately that the USDA will be in charge of administering key portions of the legislation if it is eventually signed into law. Though these specific changes are improvements to this legislation, the agreement reached on behalf of the Agriculture Committee did not outweigh the concerns I had with the bill. For this reason, I could not support the bill's final passage.
Ultimately, H.R. 2454 passed the House by a vote of 219 to 212 despite my opposition. I voted against this bill because I believe that in tough economic times we should be pragmatic in our approach to energy reform. I cannot vote for any legislation that puts an additional economic burden on hardworking Alabamians, especially during a recession. I am concerned that portions of this bill may raise energy costs for consumers, small businesses, and farmers without any assurance that the legislation will adequately address climate change.
As a legislator, I must weigh heavily the consequences of enacting laws that could increase living expenses for hardworking Alabamians. Please be assured that I plan to monitor the progress of this bill through the Senate and will continue to weigh your concerns in the future. As your congressman, I will always be committed to developing and supporting public policy that meets your need for affordable electricity and a strong, viable local economy.
Again, thank you for contacting me. I appreciate your thoughts and value your input. Please do not hesitate to contact me or my office regarding this or any other matter that is important to you. If you would like to learn more about my positions on the issues or receive regular updates on what we are working on in Congress, please visit my website at www.bright.house.gov and sign up for my e-Newsletter.
Sincerely,
Bobby Bright
Member of Congress
Is this an offspring of Paul? Another hereditary member of the House of Lords?
Keep her letter and send her a copy along with your energy bill when we are all freezing in the dark! If we still have mail delivery.
I got a similar letter from Brian Higgins (Western NY).
Of course he assured me that it wasn’t a tax increase, and said we can’t afford to “do nothing”. Just like Obama always says that those who oppose his ideas want to do nothing.
And he told me that the new green economy will mean lots of new jobs for Western New York.
Come to think of it, Senator Hillary promised lots of new jobs for Western New York. And people keep falling for it.
We need a "Congressmen must read the Bill" Bill.
Yes! That would mean fewer and shorter Bills. That would be a good thing!
“Is this an offspring of Paul?”
It’s actually his widow. I think she got elected back in 2006.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.