This is for personal, noncommercial use only.
Today's Front Page
Gas Buddy
Energy vote has the right angry with LoBiondo
Republican voted for cap-and-trade bill
Print this Article- Font Size:
- Default font size
- Larger font size
Almost a week after U.S. Rep. Frank LoBiondo cast a rare Republican yes vote for federal cap-and-trade energy legislation, aide Jason Galanes said the office every night is still faxing the congressman 100 to 150 summaries of telephone calls that his staff received about the bill.
The response initially was overwhelmingly negative, he said, with many calls coming from beyond of the district, but the tone has moderated recently.
The congressman was one of eight Republicans who helped push the bill to approval in the House of Representatives by a slim 219-212 margin July 3. Forty-four Democrats voting against it
In New Jersey, Republicans Chris Smith, R-4th and Leonard Lance, R-5th along with the state's eight congressional Democrats voted with LoBiondo. The bill now heads to the Senate.
The anger remains among those on the right who believe the Republicans betrayed their beliefs with the vote, which seeks to cap and reduce emissions and sets up systems to trade emissions and renewable-energy credits.
"I have no idea why anyone would support this bill," said Steve Lonegan, senior policy director for the New Jersey branch of Americans for Prosperity, a national libertarian-leaning group.
It makes energy more expensive at the cost of state jobs and in some cases, he said, forces people to upgrade their homes' energy efficiency before it can be sold.
"They either don't understand the bill or the consequences," Lonegan said, "or they don't understand how it will undermine our ability to compete or prosper."
Online denunciation has been equally swift and certain.
On politicalmavens.com, a right-leaning site and self-described "forum of enlightenment in an effort to clarify one's thinking," author Arnold Ahlert listed the eight Republicans as he wrote "They are precisely the kind of RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) who need to be sent home in the next election. This economy-killing bill couldn't have passed without their votes."
Other sites call them "traitors" or "idiots" and say they need to be voted out of office.
On Michelle Malkin's blog, the nationally syndicated commentator went so far as to post a wanted poster of the so-called "GOP's Cap-and-Tax 8." It said they were wanted "for selling out taxpayers."
Environmentalists defended Lo-Biondo.
Jeff Tittel, executive director of the state's Sierra Club branch, said the vote was consistent with LoBiondo's long environmental record that has included support for green energy, open space and shore protection.
LoBiondo's sprawling district covers all or parts of seven counties in southern New Jersey. It is low-slung and coastal, stretching along about 150 miles of Delaware River and Atlantic Ocean coastline, rising to a high point of just more than 170 feet in Harrison Township, Gloucester County.
It is just that sort of terrain that would be the most effected by sea level rise, Tittel said. And the region's dependence on tourism and fisheries makes it susceptible to global warming.
In an editorial sent to newspapers Thursday and a statement posted on his congressional Web site, LoBiondo defended his vote.
The bill supports clean energy as it works to reduce American dependence on foreign energy, he wrote, adding, "I disagree with those who do not believe it is our obligation to leave the environment in a clean, safe and livable condition for future generations."
While the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated people would expect to see a $175 increase in annual energy costs by 2020, LoBiondo said federal the Energy Information Administration suggested state residents may see less than a $50 increase in 10 years, owing to the fact that the state has had similar regulations in place for years.
He also called for local manufacturing of the components needed for solar and wind projects.
LoBiondo wrote that he was gratified that farmers were exempted from the bill and continue to be regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture, rather than the Environmental Protection Agency. But he was disappointed that drilling for oil and natural gas could still occur off the state's coast, which he opposes.
Ultimately, LoBiondo wrote, the bill "seeks to break the cycle of our past, give us the opportunities to promote domestic energy production free from foreign sources, create new economic and job opportunities here at home, and finally move our nation towards real energy independence in an environmentally-conscious manner."
E-mail Derek Harper:
What the legislation would do
The U.S. House of Representatives voted 219-212 for the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 bill last week. It now goes to the Senate. What would it do?
n Caps emissions and reduces them to 17 percent of 2005 levels by 2050 while phasing in prohibitions and requiring companies use credits to offset their carbon dioxide emissions. It also sets penalties for violations;
n Sets up a system to trade emissions credits;
n Requires utilities to increasingly fulfill demand with a mix of renewable power and efficiency;
n Sets up a system for trading renewable energy credits;
n Requires the EPA to investigate large-scale carbon capture and sequestration;
n Requires the Secretary of Energy to set up an electric vehicle program and provide financial assistance for their manufacture;
n Updates the national power grid with additional renewable energy;
n Increases efficiency standards for new and retrofit buildings as well as for electric motors and appliances;
n Mandates the government set up a program to write grants for regeneration projects at fossil fuel and nuclear power plants;
n Offers grants for businesses and projects that improve efficiency and use alternative and renewable energy;
n Provides tax credits for lower-income households paying more for energy.
Posted in Cape_may on Friday, July 3, 2009 3:05 am
1 comment:
Click here to report a comment as abusive.