Senator Reid Tells Us Where He Stands On Climate Change, Cap-and-Trade
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
Unless he makes some kind of about-turn with his thinking, Nevada’s U.S. Senator Harry Reid has clearly stated his point of view about the Climate Change legislation taking shape in the U.S. Senate.
In a letter of response to a request for opposition to the cap-and-trade proposal, Senator Reid wrote…
His message continued by providing a link to a Department of Energy Website where there are several analyses for the Waxman-Markey proposal. Senator Reid’s e-mail continues by saying noting that the analyses of these cap-and-trade proposals indicate that “mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are possible at a very low cost, and the economic impacts are minor and gradual.”
As we were invited, we also offer you the opportunity to take a look by going to http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/climate.html.
It’s not completely explained how this information, that is dated for April, corresponds with the actual legislation that passed the House with ink still drying from middle-of-the-night changes to acquire the necessary votes for the squeaker passage. In asking for more information in a follow-up from Senator Reid, we also inquired what assurances there might be that this time a government forecast of expectations can be trusted.
It seems that when the massive stimulus spending spree was being debated, the projections were that passage would keep unemployment levels from going past a point which is now firmly in our rear-view mirror as having been passed with no slow-down.
We don’t agree with the reason for needing to have our federal government considering a Climate Change cap-and-trade in the first place, but it shouldn’t be too much to be told the truth about how and how much we’re going to have to pay to achieve the further control our government officials believe they should have over us.
Unless he makes some kind of about-turn with his thinking, Nevada’s U.S. Senator Harry Reid has clearly stated his point of view about the Climate Change legislation taking shape in the U.S. Senate.
In a letter of response to a request for opposition to the cap-and-trade proposal, Senator Reid wrote…
"I believe that global warming constitutes one of the greatest challenges of our time and that the federal government must take action to reduce global greenhouse emissions. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a meaningful way, we must take immediate action to dramatically reduce fossil fuel consumption. This can only occur if America increases its renewable energy production, improves energy efficiency of buildings and appliances, develops cleaner burning alternative fuels and improves vehicle fuel efficiency. Capping greenhouse gas emissions will help ensure that the way we use and think about energy reflects the very real threats from global climate change."
His message continued by providing a link to a Department of Energy Website where there are several analyses for the Waxman-Markey proposal. Senator Reid’s e-mail continues by saying noting that the analyses of these cap-and-trade proposals indicate that “mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are possible at a very low cost, and the economic impacts are minor and gradual.”
As we were invited, we also offer you the opportunity to take a look by going to http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/climate.html.
It’s not completely explained how this information, that is dated for April, corresponds with the actual legislation that passed the House with ink still drying from middle-of-the-night changes to acquire the necessary votes for the squeaker passage. In asking for more information in a follow-up from Senator Reid, we also inquired what assurances there might be that this time a government forecast of expectations can be trusted.
It seems that when the massive stimulus spending spree was being debated, the projections were that passage would keep unemployment levels from going past a point which is now firmly in our rear-view mirror as having been passed with no slow-down.
We don’t agree with the reason for needing to have our federal government considering a Climate Change cap-and-trade in the first place, but it shouldn’t be too much to be told the truth about how and how much we’re going to have to pay to achieve the further control our government officials believe they should have over us.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 7/15/2009 5:14 AM 
Categories: Climate Change
Tags: Cap and Trade Nevada Global Warming
Categories: Climate Change
Tags: Cap and Trade Nevada Global Warming
Comments