Climate bills in Oregon criticized for negatively impacting rural farming communities

Climate bills in the Oregon legislature are being criticized for potential devastation of rural communities and could possibly fuel further inflation.

One of the bills titled House Bill 3158, the "Clean Diesel Engine Tax" would add new taxes to off-road machinery, such as that used in farming and logging.

The Oregon Farm Bureau (OFB) came out against this bill, pointing out that it would tax virtually every piece of equipment that's used in agriculture, plus the fuel and tires that are also necessary for its use.

The OFB added that this bill would put the burden on rural businesses with the cost of retrofitting trucks in the state's largest metropolitan area. Revenues from this tax would be transferred to the "Clean Diesel Engine Fund."

"Rural communities are not responsible for Portland's air quality, but HB 3158 puts that responsibility squarely, and inappropriately, on the backs of our members," the Farm Bureau stated in written testimony.

Another climate bill being criticized is SB 803 which would expand Portland's petroleum-based diesel phase-out to the rest of Oregon.

what is terrifying is Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act/”Green New Deal” is considered to be brilliant by veteran ABC Australia “journalist”, Geraldine Doogue, and her climate alarmist guests:

AUDIO: 15min42sec: 18 March: ABC Australia: Tackling Transitions: US subsidies
Presenter: Geraldine Doogue
The US has turbo-charged the clean energy transition raising concern that it will lure capital, talent and tech through hundreds of billions of dollars worth of subsidies under the Inflation Reduction Act. Can Australia compete or benefit? Guests: Kane Thorton, Chief Executive, Clean Energy Council and Dr Alan Finkel, former Chief Scientist and strategic adviser to the Australian government.
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/saturdayextra/tackling-transitions/102113090

the former Chief Scientist, Finkel, has been at the centre of a controversy for years:

CHIEFSCIENTIST.GOV.AU: Clarifying the Chief Scientist’s position on reducing carbon emissions
Saturday, 01 December 2018; last updated 18 Dec 2020
In response to an article published across multiple news sources 2–4 December 2018, Dr Finkel wrote a letter to the editors to clarify his position on reducing Australia’s carbon emissions. His response, which was published by several of the newspapers, is available below.

Dear Editor,
On Monday 3 December you published an opinion piece by Andrew Bolt titled ‘Less marching, more learning’* which included a reference to me ‘admitting’ that we “could stop all Australia’s emissions – junk every car, shut every power station, put a cork in every cow – and the effect on the climate would still be ‘virtually nothing’”.

Those are Andrew Bolt’s words, not mine, and they are a complete misrepresentation of my position. They suggest that we should do nothing to reduce our carbon emissions, a stance I reject, and I wish to correct the record.

On 1 June 2017 I attended a Senate Estimates hearing where Senator Ian Macdonald asked if the world was to reduce its carbon emissions by 1.3 per cent, which is approximately Australia’s rate of emissions, what impact would that make on the changing climate of the world. My response was that the impact would be virtually nothing but I immediately continued by explaining that doing nothing is not a position that we can responsibly take because emissions reductions is a little bit like voting, in that if everyone took the attitude that their vote does not count and no-one voted, we would not have a democracy...
https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2018/12/clarifying-the-chief-scientists-position-on-reducing-carbon-emissions

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.