Key Vote NO on the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, S. 2262

Freedom Works ^ | May 3 2014 | Matt Kibbe

[PoloSec]

As one of our over 6 million FreedomWorks activists nationwide, I urge you to contact your senators and ask them to vote NO on the “Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act”, S. 2262. Introduced by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), this bill, while being sold as an energy efficiency overhaul for the country, is merely a conglomeration of government meddling and waste.

The crux of the bill charges the Department of Energy (DOE) to “encourage and support the adoption” of efficiency codes, developed by unaccountable third parties, by the states. The bill appropriates taxpayer dollars to lure cash-strapped states into implementing these restrictive new codes for businesses and homes. Further, despite the bill stating that these specific standards will be non-binding on a federal level, the legislation instructs the DOE to begin researching mandatory federal efficiency standards in addition to formulating potential legislation for additional efficiency incentives and enforcement.

The bill goes on to appropriate grant funding for the states to establish worker training programs and state-financing programs for building renovations and retrofits, among other small grants, rebates and handouts at the periphery of the bill’s text.

Wasteful deficit spending aside, what authors and cosponsors of legislation like this fail to realize is that markets outperform mandates. The pretense of the bill is an attempt to save Americans money on energy costs. Yet government codes only serve to limit choice, drive scarcity, and thus raise prices. Markets, on the other hand, reward efficiency without all the overhead of government. From top-to-bottom, this bill sets a dangerous precedent in the wrong direction for the American economy.

There is an alternative: Senator Ted Cruz has introduced the American Energy Renaissance Act (S. 2170), a bill which would free the American energy market to compete both at home and globally, dramatically lower energy costs, create hundreds of thousands of jobs.

I urge you to call your senators and ask them to vote NO on the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, S. 2262. We will count their vote as a KEY VOTE when calculating FreedomWorks’ Economic Freedom Scorecard for 2014. The scorecard is used to determine eligibility for the FreedomFighter Award, which recognizes Members of Congress who consistently vote to support economic freedom.

Sincerely, Matt Kibbe President and CEO, FreedomWorks

[thackney]

“NO” ON THE SHAHEEN-PORTMAN ENERGY EFFICIENCY BILL
http://heritageaction.com/key-votes/shaheen-portman-energy-efficiency-bill/
MAY 02, 2014

Next week, the Senate is likely to consider the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013 (S. 2262). Introduced by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)7% and Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH)54%, it claims to promote energy savings in industrial and commercial buildings. The bill provides taxpayer-funded federal incentives to make building and manufacturing processes more efficient, but these “incentives” would burden taxpayers and consumers alike while producing no tangible benefits. They are also duplicative of federal and state efforts.

This inappropriate intervention comes in the form of ‘voluntary’ federal mandates and taxpayer funded subsidies for energy efficiency updates in state government and tribal buildings. Specifically, Heritage notes, “The bill authorizes $200 million of taxpayer money to “incentivize and assist” states and tribal groups to meet allegedly voluntary building codes.”

Shaheen-Portman duplicates laws that are already in place, such as the “Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, with provisions for energy savings in federal, state, local, and commercial industrial buildings as well as for a green jobs program.” EISA authorized a $10 billion block grant over five years for states, cities, and counties to do efficiency updates. Myriad other programs already exist and comprise over 4,200 state initiatives that have directed billions of dollars to energy efficiency retrofits.

In addition, millions of dollars would be wasted on workforce training programs. Heritage explains that since the efficiency gains do not have market value (or industries would already have adopted them), “the government must artificially create both the demand and the supply.”

Even the environmental “benefits” of the Shaheen-Portman bill are negligible. Whatever one believes about protecting the environment by reducing greenhouse-gas emissions (GHGs), this legislation would fail to change the climate in any meaningful or substantial way.

The bill is also problematic because it “intends to improve transparency and direction for the Department of Energy’s Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO), which provides grants to improve manufacturing efficiency.” While improved transparency and direction for a program are laudable goals, Heritage contends this office should not even exist.

AMO duplicates many existing state programs and engages in “blatant corporate welfare for large companies, or research and development projects conducted in universities, which the private sector should collaborate with and fund.” (emphasis added) For example, LyondellBasell received a $4.5 million grant and is one of the largest chemical companies in the world with annual revenues of $45 billion and a market capitalization of $35.7 billion. Taxpayers should not be subsidizing a company like that.

Finally, the bill would force energy efficiency into mortgage appraisals. It would impose new regulations on loans insured by federal agencies and would dictate an increase in the amount of money that people would be able to borrow. “Loan applicants will effectively have their income increased because underwriters will be required to reduce borrowers’ estimated future living expenses,” Heritage explains. The bill would also permit the micromanagement of the appraisal process, by requiring appraisers to add the value of estimated energy savings to a property, but again, home’s existing energy-conservation measures should already be part of the estimated value of the home. These new regulations would open the door for artificially inflating appraisal values.

As Heritage notes, only the free-market has been proven to decrease costs and increase efficiency in energy production. The federal government’s role in energy efficiency should be limited to providing information to consumers make well-informed decisions. This legislation allows the government to overstep its boundaries.

[Tilted Irish Kilt]

thackney:"..(A) Myriad other programs already exist and comprise over 4,200 state initiatives that have directed billions of dollars to energy efficiency retrofits."

The title of this bill sounds encouraging ,but it is another case of FEDGovt."Double-talk/ Double-Speak" of redundancy and over-reach.
It represents itself as encouraging energy conservation but also allows Federal micro-managing appraisal values of commercial property and production.
Consider it as a 'cloaked' taxation program , because that is what it is.
While it currently concerns itself only with commercial /manufacture properties,
it can later can be easily expanded (through over-reach) to including residential properties appraisals, and increased taxation.
This bill is a reduncancy , expands FedGovt. intrusion into commercial / manufacturing properties and taxation appraisals, and is unneeded .