Find us on Facebook
Follow us on TwitterPerriello responds to GOP attack on green bill vote
Rep. Tom Perriello, D-5th District, is celebrating American independence a few days early.
The U.S. House of Representatives voted last week to pass the American Clean Energy Security Act with a narrow vote of 219-212. Perriello was one of 211 Democrats to vote in favor of the bill. Forty-four Democrats opposed it.
“I’m just ecstatic,” Perriello said Wednesday. “We’ve just declared our independence from foreign oil.”
House Republicans, however, are not so happy. Eight Republicans voted for the bill and 168 opposed it.
The National Republican Congressional Committee has paid for a TV advertisement — which began airing Wednesday and will run for a week in the Lynchburg and Roanoke markets — attacking Perriello and Obama for their support of the green jobs bill.
The 30-second ad claims that the ACES bill will “destroy jobs and cost middle class families $1,800 a year — every time you turn on a switch.”
To combat global warming, the cap-and-trade bill would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions and charge companies allowances for further emissions. Initially, however, allowances would be handed out at no cost. The ACES bill would require a 17 percent reduction in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by 2020 and by more than 80 percent by 2050.
The result could be higher energy costs for consumers — Perriello said the increases would average $12 a month — although varying sources predict a wide range of estimated costs. The government-backed Environmental Protection Agency said the bill would cost consumers an average of $80 to $111 a year, but that would fluctuate as the cost of allowances rises.
The independent Congressional Budget Office estimated an average annual cost of $175 per household, but that would vary with wealth. Low-income consumers could save $40 a year, but high-income consumers could see as much as a $340 increase.
The conservative Heritage Foundation predicts that by 2035, the average household bill could top $1,241, assuming that reduced energy sources would not be immediately replaced by new technology. Republicans have also referenced an MIT study claiming that consumers could see a $3,100 increase, but an author of that study has declared it was being improperly cited.
“I think it’s hogwash and cowardice,” Perriello said of the new television ad. “We have had an oil dependence probably since the day I was born and I think this bill is going to be a big winner for central and Southside Virginia. For biofuel, for our farmers.”
Perriello supported converting tobacco farms into future biomass producers and turning farm and municipal waste into power. The bill aims to create millions of green jobs through alternative energy sources, but Republicans claim the legislation would actually cut jobs and depress real estate prices.
“It’s just false,” Perriello said. “We’re already losing the jobs. This is what (critics) don’t get. We are hemorrhaging jobs in the energy sector. The status quo that they support is a job-loss strategy. We have a job-winning strategy by making investments in the future of technology.”
In conjunction with the Danville Pittsylvania Chamber of Commerce, Perriello will be at the Virginia International Raceway today at 11 a.m. for an announcement about “Green Skills.”
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
JacksonPollock, Just wanted to say…...GREAT post (July 5th). You nailed the issues. My applause.
A couple of points here, are you aware that when you buy a gallon of gasoline in Virginia, you pay 18.4 cents Federal tax, then you pay an additional state tax of 38 cents. that is a total of 56.4 cents. The oil company that you hate so much makes less than that. Me thinks your hatred is misdirected.
Secondly, global warming is a real event. It is as natural as the tides. It has been going on for million of years here on this planet. I have asked one of you Algore followers to explain how the last ice age ended. As yet none of you have stepped forward to explain it. The polar ice cap was more than one mile thick where both Chicago and New York City are located today. Where did it go? How did it melt? There were no factories then, no SUVs, so who is to blame for the ice melting back then?? Can one of you please explain it?
danvillevillander - Where did you come from? You sound like somebody may have changed her call sign to protect the guilty; but, that’s cool, I’ll play along. (LOL - wink, wink)
Your comment is ridiculous on several levels. 1. My response was to HPHP… Like I told him, I respect his opinion, I simply disagree. 2. Your comments aren’t really adding anything to the discussion. 3. You’re not offering us your opinion; you’re just acusing me of ... wait, what is it exactly you’re acusing me of ?
Also, I can assure you my soul is not empty. It is filled with the warm, embracing spirit of freedom! Freedom which is a birthright of being born in this great country. Freedom to recognize that the very freedoms I cherish are those granted by the people, not by the government. Freedom to take risk and freedom to fail. Freedom to chart my on destiny, in my own way, with as little and limited government intrusion as possible. Freedom to disagree with my fellow citizens while respecting their right to hold differing views than me. Freedom to express my own views even when I recognize they may not be overly popular. It is this spirit of freedom that fills my soul. What fills yours?
Rockit, good to know multi-nationals and the GOP have little yapping attack dogs like you to keep them propped up. By the way, they really don’t care what you think about “free markets”, just keep doing their little dirty work down here with the rest of us proletariat. Hope you make a million some day because that will undoubtedly fill that empty soul of yours.
HPHPHPHP
I respect your opinion, I simply disagree. I believe in free markets and free enterprise. Because I do, I believe anyone willing to take a risk in the market place should be able to reap whatever profit margins the market will bear. Sometimes that means thousands of dollars in profit. Sometimes that means billions of dollars in profit. The only difference between a small business and a multinational corporation is the scale of activity, control, and capital invested and/or earned. As long as the market determines what a fair profit is and not the government, I don’t see a problem.
You introduce the idea of government controlling or setting arbitrary limits on private profits—I don’t advocate for this at all. I have no interest in telling them how much they should make, but I know outlandish profits when I see it. I wholeheartedly agree that there are other middle merchants involved in the selling process, and that the oil companies are going to make their profits, as (this is obvious) there isn’t a single thing that we consumers can do about it at all—EXCEPT develop new energy sources who, we have to hope, will not rip us off in the same unspeakable way. There’s only a minor point to be made about the retirement funds of the masses, as the percentage of oil stock that they control is far, far less than the controlling stockholders who always include the oil executives who are getting scores of millions per year in salary plus retirement funds that allow them to buy small, third-world countries. Of course, this has applied to their planning partners, the auto executives too, who’ve become inseparable and indistinguishable as far as pure greed goes. It’s time for some carefully laid plans for big changes, but not more of the same grossly excessive profiteering by a few.
For HPHPHP
A lot of people like yourself have complained about the profits that oil companies make. And I guess if you’re paying $3-$4 a gallon, 35 billion dollars per quarter sounds like a lot. Fine. Here’s the thing - what do you feel would be a fair profit for the oil companies to make? 30 billion a quarter? 25 billion? 1 billion? Pick a number. Now let’s say that the government comes along and says to you that you are only allowed to make $10 thousand this year. Or, maybe they feel a little generous and let you make $20 thousand. Is that okay with you? What if you’re used to making $70 thousand a year? Sorry, the government has determined that a fair rate of return for your efforts is $20 thousand. That’s how wage and price controls work. And, if they do that to big corportations, how long will it be until they get around to average Joes like us.
The real important number here is not the oil companies profits. The important number is what you pay at the pump. The oil companies are going to make their profits. If they don’t, they’ll just shut down production until they do. The price you pay at the pump is determined just as much by the middleman distributors, the brokers who trade in oil futures, the restrictive environmental regulations, and state and federal taxes as it is by the oil companies.
And, on the upside, think of how many 401 plans are loaded up with oil stocks. If you slam the oil companies, that’s going to hurt not only those companies but the ordinary people who are depending on those retirement funds.
Of course, this is just my opinion.
One of the most scandalous, predatory, and maddening things to average citizens like me that has happened over the past few years has been those quarterly American oil company profit reports—while we were paying $3-$4 a gallon for our gasoline, all the oil companies regularly reported profits in excess of $35 billion per quarter—all while actually claiming the the consumer is to blame. Can’t understand why people don’t trust our oil companies??? And they’re not drilling the reserves that they already have on land, so why scam us all to ruin our shorelines and beaches and beautiful national parks?? Now they’re running multi-million dollar ad campaigns to discourage anybody’s alternative energy development plans except their own!! Gee, anybody wonder why only those with vested interests in Big Oil still stands up for their integrity?? I’m not a Democrat nor a Republican, and they’re not fooling me any longer!
JP - WELCOME BACK! We missed you!
Your 31,000 number doesn’t make sense. You claim this includes “scientists” teaching at elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, and colleges. That’s a misrepresentation (perhaps unintentional) of the amount of research that supports the Global Warming myth. Many, in fact I’m going out on a limb here, MOST of these “scientist” teaching in these schools are just that, teachers. Most of them are not actively engaged in climatic research, they are just parroting (your word) the research of others. And those others actually doing the research are for the most part being paid thru government grants.
Do you remember last fall in the middle of the Presidential election there was a large group of scientists (I think it was about 10,000) who signed a petition stating that global warming was a myth. And, they provided their own research and rationale for making that assertion. Now, I’m not a scientist. You’ve even called me dumb as dirt before. But, it seems to me that if we have a large number of research scientists, who don’t happen to be on the government payroll, making a statement like that then it’s certainly worth considering.
Now about this falling back to oil and gas thing. We have enough oil reserves right now that if we begin to expand our off shore drilling operations, if we explore for additional oil deposits in Alaska, while at the same time increasing our power generation by nuclear, geothermal, and wind methods, we won’t have to import oil. But of all these suggestions, the only one that Democrats seem at all interested in is wind. You don’t want us to drill off shore. You don’t want us to drill in Alaska. You don’t want us to increase nuclear power. And you sure don’t want us to take advantage of the geothermal opportunities in Yellowstone. What are we supposed to do? Where are we supposed to get our fuel? Let’s not get anymore oil from the Middle East. You tell me. Where do we go to get our fuel? If you don’t want us to amp up our domestic power production, where do we go if not the Middle East?
On the big oil thing. Your criticism is completely misplaced. Last year when the price of gasoline went through the roof, who caused that? You and many others immediately say “big oil, big oil, those dirty bastxxds!“ But that’s not true. Those price spikes were cause by traders buying futures in the oil market. To keep the math simple, say I buy 100,000 barrels of oil today at $50 a barrel. I sell my interest in that oil next week at $100 a barrel. I just made a $50 a barrel profit on oil that isn’t even out of the ground yet. I made that profit. Not the oil company. You want to be mad at somebody, be mad at the brokers who are trading the oil futures, not the company that’s just trying to produce enough energy for us. Unless, of course, you want to nationalize the oil companies and I know you don’t want to do that.
what about the hole in the ozone layer? is that some kind of natural event that is of no consequence?
Advertisement